Alamo City Engineering Services, Inc. (SP4701-24-Q-0159)

B-422901.2 Jan 31, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Alamo City Engineering Services, Inc. (ACES), of Spring Branch, Texas, protests the issuance of an order to Advantaged Solutions, Inc., of Washington, District of Columbia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP4701-24-Q-0159, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for brand name information technology (IT) services. The protester contends the solicitation included unduly restrictive requirements, that the awardee was pre-selected, and that the agency failed to give serious evaluation consideration to ACES's quotation. We dismiss the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Alamo City Engineering Services, Inc. File: B-422901.2 Date: January 31, 2025 Bradley D. Newberry, Esq., Alamo City Engineering Services, Inc., for the protester. Pamela Marple, Esq., and Christopher O’Brien, Esq., Greenberg Traurig, LLP, for Advantaged Solutions, Inc., the intervenor. Ashley M. Kelly, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Heather Self, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging terms of the solicitation as unduly restrictive of competition and contention that protester was improperly eliminated from consideration as a qualified source are dismissed as untimely. 2. Protest alleging agency acted in bad faith is dismissed for failing to set forth a factually sufficient basis of protest. DECISION Alamo City Engineering Services, Inc. (ACES), of Spring Branch, Texas, protests the issuance of an order to Advantaged Solutions, Inc., of Washington, District of Columbia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP4701-24-Q-0159, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for brand name information technology (IT) services. The protester contends the solicitation included unduly restrictive requirements, that the awardee was pre-selected, and that the agency failed to give serious evaluation consideration to ACES’s quotation. We dismiss the protest. BACKGROUND On August 20, 2024, using the General Services Administration’s (GSA) eBuy website and under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, DLA issued the solicitation to holders of GSA federal supply schedule (FSS) schedule 70 contracts and to holders of Department of Defense (DOD) Enterprise Software Initiative (ESI)[1] Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) under FSS schedule 70, seeking to purchase IT services. Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2; Agency Report (AR) Exh. 1, RFQ at 1, 3, 69.[2] Specifically, the solicitation informed vendors that as a result of the agency’s currently used IT enterprise resource planning (ERP) software “SAP Suite 7 reaching end of life support in 2027, DLA had a requirement to upgrade to SAP S/4 HANA,” and that the agency intended to place an order “against a GSA FSS Contract and/or a DoD ESI BPA” to meet this requirement.[3] COS/MOL at 2; see also RFQ at 8, 69. The solicitation contemplated issuance of an order with a 1-year base period and a single 1-year option period on a primarily fixed-price basis with a time-and-materials component for travel. RFQ at 43, 69. The order would be issued on a lowest-priced, technical acceptable (LPTA) basis, considering the following three non-price factors: (1) level of effort/labor mix; (2) key personnel; and (3) technical approach. Id. at 70. The solicitation provided that “[t]echnical acceptability requires being acceptable for all non-price factors.” Id. On August 21, the agency issued a limited sources justification authorizing the procurement of “brand name SAP services from an authorized SAP reseller in support of the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Program[‘s]. . . S/4 HANA Upgrade from Suite 7.” AR, Exh. 2, RFQ amend. 1 at 2.[4] Consistent with the solicitation, the limited source justification stated the resulting order would be placed against a GSA FSS contract or “may use” a DOD ESI BPA. Id. The justification acknowledged that while three ESI BPA holders offered SAP services on their BPAs, the agency decided “to issue the solicitation on an unrestricted basis via a Request for Quotation (RFQ) posted to the GSA e-Buy System,” in an effort to obtain the best value through “multiple proposals from authorized resellers.” Id.