Loch Harbour Group, Inc. (SP4701-24-Q-0070)

B-423384.2 Sep 12, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Loch Harbour Group, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, protests its elimination from the competition under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP4701-24-Q-0070, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for application deployment and maintenance support for the DLA Enterprise Platform. The protester primarily challenges the agency's decision to eliminate Loch Harbour from consideration for award. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Loch Harbour Group, Inc. File: B-423384.2 Date: September 12, 2025 J. Bradley Reaves, Esq., Jacob D. Noe, Esq., and Kenneth M. Hyde, Esq., Reaves GovCon Group, for the protester. Ashley Kelly, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Emily R. O’Hara, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging elimination from award is denied where agency reasonably found protester’s quotation failed to comply with a material solicitation requirement. DECISION Loch Harbour Group, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, protests its elimination from the competition under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP4701-24-Q-0070, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for application deployment and maintenance support for the DLA Enterprise Platform. The protester primarily challenges the agency’s decision to eliminate Loch Harbour from consideration for award. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on September 18, 2024, under the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) using the procedures set forth in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4. Agency Report (AR), Exh. 2, RFQ at 158, 161. The solicitation contemplated the establishment of a single blanket purchase agreement (BPA) for each tier of a two-tiered requirement as described below. Id. at 160. The agency sought a full range of information technology services for approved projects, including the application deployment and maintenance support for the DLA Enterprise Platform and all use-cases deployed currently or requested in task orders issued under the BPA. Id. at 167. The agency would issue task orders in accordance with the need of the program. Id. at 161. Individual task orders would be awarded on a fixed-price basis for a 12-month base period and up to four 12-month option periods depending on the customer’s requirements. Id. at 162. The DLA Enterprise Platform Support Services BPA requirements consist of two tiers of service, tier 1 and tier 2. Id. at 177-178. Tiers were to be separated by level of scope, complexity, level of effort, magnitude, and priority level of use-cases to DLA’s internal timeline. Id. at 177. Competition under tier 1 was unrestricted, whereas competition under tier 2 was restricted to small businesses. Id. at 160 (“Tier 2 is a small business set-aside and will be awarded against the successful offeror’s General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule.”) Id. Relevant here, for tier 2, the RFQ provided that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering the following factors: technical approach; key personnel; and price. Id. at 204-206. Loch Harbour submitted a quotation to be considered under tier 2, which was set aside for small businesses. Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2. DLA initially established the tier 2 BPA with Loch Harbour on March 4, 2025. Id. On March 13, an unsuccessful vendor, IntegrityPro Consulting, LLC, filed a protest with our Office, contending that Loch Harbour was ineligible for the tier 2 BPA because Loch Harbour was not a small business. AR, Exh. 5, IntegrityPro Protest at 1-2. In response, DLA proposed to take the following corrective action: (1) terminate the tier 2 BPA to Loch Harbour; (2) reevaluate quotations; (3) make a new award decision; and (4) take any other measures DLA deemed necessary. AR, Exh. 9, Apr. 2 Notice of Corrective Action at 1. Accordingly, based on the agency’s proposed corrective action, we dismissed that protest as academic on April 9. IntegrityPro Consulting, LLC, B‑423384, Apr. 9, 2025 (unpublished decision). On April 24, as part of the reevaluation, DLA requested revised quotations. With its request for a revised quotation from Loch Harbor, DLA asked Loch Harbour to include any additional price discounts, as well as a signed copy of all solicitation amendments and a copy of Loch Harbour’s GSA schedule. AR, Ex. 11, Email Exchange & Revised Quotation at 4. Loch Harbour responded by the May 1 deadline, but the firm failed to submit its GSA schedule with its revised quotation. COS/MOL at 4; see AR, Ex. 11, Email Exchange & Revised Quotation.