Low Voltage Wiring, Ltd. (W912DY-25-R-0021)

B-423502.3,B-423502.4 Jan 30, 2026 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Low Voltage Wiring, LTD (LVW), a small business of Colorado Springs, Colorado, protests the issuance of a task order to TeamGOV, Inc., a small business of Hyattsville, Maryland, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. W912DY-25-R-0021, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), for preventative and corrective maintenance services for access control points (ACP) at 19 Army installations in the northeast region of the United States. LVW argues that the agency evaluated its technical quotation and past performance information unreasonably and inconsistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria. LVW also challenges the agency's best-value tradeoff determination. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Low Voltage Wiring, Ltd. File: B-423502.3; B-423502.4 Date: January 30, 2026 Bret S. Wacker, Esq., and Ronald D. Sullivan, Esq., Clark Hill PLC, for the protester. Christopher R. Shiplett, Esq., Randolph Law, PLLC, for the intervenor, TeamGOV, Inc. Robert I. Moore, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Sarah T. Zaffina, Esq., and Heather Weiner, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency's evaluation of the vendor's quotation was unreasonable because the agency reached different evaluation conclusions in a related procurement is denied, where the procurements were conducted under different solicitations and evaluated by different evaluation teams. DECISION Low Voltage Wiring, LTD (LVW), a small business of Colorado Springs, Colorado, protests the issuance of a task order to TeamGOV, Inc., a small business of Hyattsville, Maryland, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. W912DY‑25‑R‑0021, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), for preventative and corrective maintenance services for access control points (ACP) at 19 Army installations in the northeast region of the United States. LVW argues that the agency evaluated its technical quotation and past performance information unreasonably and inconsistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria. LVW also challenges the agency's best‑value tradeoff determination. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on April 17, 2025, to General Services Administration schedule contract holders under Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 8.4 procedures.[1] Agency Report (AR), Tab 2, RFQ at 1, 3. The RFQ was set aside for small businesses and contemplated the issuance of a fixed‑price task order for a 12‑month base period with up to three 12‑month options.[2] RFQ at 5; see also AR, Tab 3C, RFQ amend. 3 at 4 (amending period of performance start date). Our Office sustained two different protests challenging awards made under the previous solicitation, RFQ No. W912DY‑24‑R‑0008 (FY2024 RFQ). This procurement is being conducted under a new solicitation for the agency's requirement.[3] Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1‑2. The RFQ advised that the Corps intended to issue an order to the responsible vendor representing the best value to the government considering the following three evaluation factors: (1) technical approach and experience (technical approach); (2) past performance; and (3) price. RFQ amend. 3 at 12. The solicitation indicated that technical approach and past performance were equally important, and that price was the least important factor. The solicitation further advised that the agency's focus was on acquiring services from vendors with superior ratings under the non‑price factors instead of issuing a task order at the lowest price. Id. LVW, the incumbent contractor, and three other vendors submitted timely quotations.[4] AR, Tab 9, Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) at 1. The source selection evaluation board evaluated the quotations as follows: VENDOR Technical Approach Past Performance Price Vendor 1 Acceptable Neutral $42,719,609 (not fair and reasonable) LVW Good Satisfactory Confidence $36,785,559 (fair and reasonable) Vendor 2 Good Satisfactory Confidence $36,725,177 (fair and reasonable) TeamGOV Outstanding Substantial Confidence $35,691,300 (fair and reasonable) Id. at 4. As relevant here, LVW's quotation received a rating of good for the technical approach factor; it was assessed one significant strength for proposing key personnel having demonstrated experience with ACP maintenance and services, which “exceeds specified performance or capability requirements” in an appreciably advantageous way for the government.[5] AR, Tab 7, Technical Approach Evaluation at 1‑2, 7.