22nd Century Technologies, Inc. (USCA24Q0007)

B-422659.4 Jan 14, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights 22nd Century Technologies, Inc., of McLean, Virginia, requests that our Office recommend that it be reimbursed the reasonable costs of filing and pursuing its protest challenging the issuance of a call order to Lamb Informatics Limited, of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. USCA24Q0007, issued by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) for centralized management and operational support services for the agency's enterprise information technology infrastructure. The requester contends that it should be reimbursed for all costs associated with its underlying protest. We deny the request. View Decision Decision Matter of: 22nd Century Technologies, Inc.--Costs File: B-422659.4 Date: January 14, 2025 W. Brad English, Esq., Maynard Nexsen, PC, for the protester. Julie A. Neville, Esq., Administrative Office of the United States Courts, for the agency. Michael P. Price, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request that GAO recommend reimbursement of protest costs is denied where the request concerns protest challenges that were not intertwined with the meritorious protest ground or otherwise independently clearly meritorious. DECISION 22nd Century Technologies, Inc., of McLean, Virginia, requests that our Office recommend that it be reimbursed the reasonable costs of filing and pursuing its protest challenging the issuance of a call order to Lamb Informatics Limited, of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. USCA24Q0007, issued by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) for centralized management and operational support services for the agency’s enterprise information technology infrastructure. The requester contends that it should be reimbursed for all costs associated with its underlying protest. We deny the request. BACKGROUND AOUSC issued the RFQ on October 31, 2023, to holders of the judiciary information technology services blanket purchase agreement (BPA). Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1. The RFQ contemplated the issuance of a single fixed-price call order against the underlying BPA and established that the agency would issue the order to the vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the government considering three evaluation factors: (1) technical approach; (2) corporate experience; and (3) price. Id. The RFQ contemplated the issuance of an order without the agency conducting exchanges; however, the solicitation contained multiple provisions that permitted the agency to conduct exchanges at the agency’s discretion. In this regard, the RFQ provided that the agency “reserve[d] the right to communicate with” the vendor whose quotation was “best-suited (i.e., the apparent successful awardee),” and only that vendor. Id. at 2. The solicitation also incorporated “Judiciary Provision 3-100,” which permitted the agency “to conduct discussions if the contracting officer later determine[d] them to be necessary.” Agency Report (AR), Tab 3.4, Judiciary Provision 3-100 at 5. AOUSC received four quotations by the November 22 deadline for receipt of quotations. COS at 2. After the agency’s initial evaluation of quotations, the contracting officer determined it to be in the best interest of the government to negotiate with all four vendors. Id. at 3. After providing each vendor with information pertaining to areas of their quotations in which the agency had decreased confidence and permitting vendors to ask clarifying questions and submit revised quotations, the agency completed its final price and technical evaluations by May 24, 2024, yielding the following results:   22nd Cent. Technologies Lamb Informatics Technical Approach High Confidence High Confidence Corp. Experience High Confidence High Confidence Price $62,012,755 $61,813,042 The contracting officer finalized an award decision memorandum on June 5, documenting the agency’s decision to issue the order to Lamb Informatics. On June 7, AOUSC notified 22nd Century that it had not been selected for the order. AR, Tab 7.1, Notice of Nonselection to 22nd Century at 1. 22nd Century filed a protest with our Office on June 17 alleging various errors with the procurement. The requester initially challenged the agency’s conduct of exchanges, arguing that the exchanges were either misleading or that the agency deviated from the terms of the solicitation by having exchanges with another vendor after the protester. Protest at 13‑14. In this regard, the requester argued that because the agency held exchanges with 22nd Century, it was “apparent that the [a]gency had concluded that [22nd Century] was [the] best-suited [vendor].” Id. at 13.