FCN Inc.

B-424249 May 13, 2026 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights FCN, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland, protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 2032H5-26-Q-0011, issued by the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), as a competitive small business set-aside to contractors holding indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement (SEWP) government-wide acquisition contract. The solicitation was issued as a "brand name or equal" procurement pursuant to the agency's "virtualization modernization initiative," and contemplates issuance of a single task order to support the agency's "transition from the current [platform] to an alternative scalable enterprise platform." Agency Report (AR), Exh. D.1.2, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 1. 1 FCN protests that the terms of the solicitation are "unduly restrictive" in that they reflect requirements that are "not necessary" to meet the agency's actual needs, and further complains that the solicitation requires use of particular Nutanix products and thereby creates a "de facto sole source procurement." Protest at 3, 5-8. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. 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: FCN Inc. File: B-424249 Date: May 13, 2026 Paul F. Khoury, Esq., George E. Petel, Esq., W. Benjamin Phillips III, Esq., and Nicholas T. Iliff, Jr., Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for the protester. Nickolas S. Card, Esq., Justin M. Wakefield, Esq., and Richard L. Hatfield, Esq., Department of the Treasury, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging various solicitation requirements as being unnecessary to meet the agency's needs is denied where the agency has provided reasonable explanations regarding the necessity of the challenged requirements. 2. Protest that “brand name or equal” procurement establishes a sole-source procurement is denied where the solicitation placed vendors on notice that either the named product or an “equal” product would be considered in the agency's evaluation. Further, protester's subsequent assertion, following the solicitation closing date and receipt of the agency report responding to its protest, that the solicitation fails to adequately describe the salient characteristics associated with particular brand name products is dismissed as untimely where the alleged defect was apparent from the face of the solicitation. DECISION FCN, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland, protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 2032H5-26-Q-0011, issued by the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), as a competitive small business set-aside to contractors holding indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement (SEWP) government-wide acquisition contract. The solicitation was issued as a “brand name or equal” procurement pursuant to the agency's “virtualization modernization initiative,” and contemplates issuance of a single task order to support the agency's “transition from the current [platform] to an alternative scalable enterprise platform.” Agency Report (AR), Exh. D.1.2, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 1.[1] FCN protests that the terms of the solicitation are “unduly restrictive” in that they reflect requirements that are “not necessary” to meet the agency's actual needs, and further complains that the solicitation requires use of particular Nutanix products and thereby creates a “de facto sole source procurement.” Protest at 3, 5-8. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. BACKGROUND On January 26, 2026, the agency issued RFQ No. 2032H5-26-Q-0011, seeking quotations to migrate “approximately 10,000 virtual machines . . . from the existing VMware infrastructure to the new designated replacement platform,” that is, to “an alternative scalable enterprise platform.” AR, Exh. D.1.2, PWS at 1‑2. More specifically, the solicitation states that it is “seeking alternative solutions that can deliver enhanced resiliency, improved scalability, and reduced operational costs,” and identifies Nutanix as the brand name product that offers such an “alternative” platform. AR, Exh. D.1.1, RFQ at 3; AR, Exh. D.1.2, PWS at 1.