I M Systems Group, Inc. (1332KP24R0005)

B-422727.4 May 28, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights I. M. Systems Group, Inc. (IMSG), a small business of Rockville, Maryland, requests reconsideration of our decision in I. M. Sys. Grp., Inc., I. M. Sys. Grp., B-422727.2, B-422727.3, Dec. 27, 2024, 2025 CPD ¶ 56, in which we denied its protest of the issuance of a task order to Science and Technology Corporation (STC), a small business of Hampton, Virginia, under task order request for proposals (TORFP) No. 1332KP24R0005, issued by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for scientific and technical services. IMSG argues that our decision contains errors of fact and law that warrant reconsideration. We deny the request for reconsideration. View Decision Decision Matter of: I. M. Systems Group, Inc.--Reconsideration File: B-422727.4 Date: May 28, 2025 Jeremy D. Burkhart, Esq., and Roza Sheffield, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for the requester Jeremiah Kline, Esq., Department of Commerce, for the agency. Thomas J. Warren, Esq., and Alexander O. Levine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. Technical Capability and Experience DIGEST Request for reconsideration of prior decision is denied where the request does not show that our earlier decision contained an error of fact or law, or present information not previously considered that would merit modification or reversal. DECISION I. M. Systems Group, Inc. (IMSG), a small business of Rockville, Maryland, requests reconsideration of our decision in I. M. Sys. Grp., Inc., I. M. Sys. Grp., B-422727.2, B‑422727.3, Dec. 27, 2024, 2025 CPD ¶ 56, in which we denied its protest of the issuance of a task order to Science and Technology Corporation (STC), a small business of Hampton, Virginia, under task order request for proposals (TORFP) No. 1332KP24R0005, issued by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for scientific and technical services. IMSG argues that our decision contains errors of fact and law that warrant reconsideration. We deny the request for reconsideration. BACKGROUND On April 5, 2024, the agency issued the TORFP as a small business set-aside, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) section 16.505 procedures, to holders of NOAA’s ProTech 2.0 Satellite Domain multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract vehicle. Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, TORFP at 2, 14.[1] The contemplated task order, titled Atmospheric Science and Technology Applications 2.0, sought research and development services for NOAA’s satellite-based atmospheric and land surface-related mission goals, including monitoring and understanding Earth’s atmosphere and land surface using satellite observations. Id. at 82. The TORFP contemplated the issuance of a hybrid fixed-price and time-and-materials task order to be performed for a base period of nine months with five option periods totaling an additional four years. Id. at 37-38, 71. The solicitation provided that the task order would be issued on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering two factors: technical approach and price. Id. at 79-80. The technical factor included three elements, listed in descending order of importance: technical capability and experience, staffing, and key personnel. Id. at 74-75, 80. The solicitation specified that the technical factor “is significantly more important than evaluated price” and advised that “as the non-price factor becomes more comparably equal amongst [o]fferors[,] their total evaluated price becomes more important and influential in determining the best value.” Id. at 80. For the technical factor and its elements, proposals would be assigned confidence ratings[2] to determine the agency’s confidence in the offeror’s understanding of, and ability to effectively meet, the performance work statement (PWS) requirements. Id. As relevant here, under the staffing element, offerors were to “[d]iscuss how the [o]fferor’s proposed labor mix satisfies the [PWS] requirements[,]” and the TORFP allowed offerors the option “to propose different labor mixes than what has historically been used[.]” Id. Under the price factor, the solicitation indicated that the government “may use various price analysis techniques [in accordance with] FAR 15.404-1” to conduct a price analysis that “will determine if the proposed pricing is complete, fair, and reasonable, aligning with PWS requirements and ProTech 2.0 contract terms.” Id. at 80. As relevant here, the solicitation specified that an “[o]fferor’s proposed pricing information must be entirely compatible with its technical proposal[,]” id. at 75, and that “prices must align with the [o]fferor’s technical proposal.” Id. at 80. The agency received five proposals, including from IMSG (the incumbent contractor) and STC.