2021 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 206; 2021 Comp. Gen. Proc. Dec. P260

2021 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 206; 2021 Comp. Gen. Proc. Dec. P260

Opinion

EDITOR'S NOTE: PAGE NUMBERS APPEARING IN BOLD BRACKETS, [CPD 1], REFLECT THE OFFICIAL PAGINATION OF THE U.S. COMPTROLLER GENERAL PROCUREMENT DECISIONS.

[CPD 1]DECISION

Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd. (Odyssey), [*2]  a small business of Wakefield, Massachusetts, protests the issuance of a task order to Millennium Engineering and Integration LLC (Millennium), of Arlington, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47QFPA21R0004, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for engineering, program management, and technical support services. Odyssey challenges Millennium's eligibility for award and the agency's evaluation of proposals.

We deny the protest.

[CPD 2]BACKGROUND

On December 18, 2020, GSA issued the RFP, through GSA e-Buy, ¹ to firms holding contracts under GSA's One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) Small Business (SB) Pool 5B indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5. Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1; Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, RFP at 2. GSA conducted this procurement on behalf of the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) at Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Id.

The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price task order for a 12-month base period of performance, four 1-year options, and a 6-month option to extend services under FAR clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. Id. at 12. The task order would address SMC/KAFB's need for engineering, program management, and technical support services for the Rocket Systems Launch Program, which serves as the primary provider of launch activities for the space research and development community supporting national security objectives and missile defense programs. Id. at 2.

The solicitation provided that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering technical capability and cost/price. Id. at 87. The technical capability factor consisted of three, equally-weighted elements: corporate experience, staffing plan, and scenario response. ² Id. The RFP advised that the rating for the technical capability factor would be based on the overall evaluation of all elements; i.e., there would not be separate ratings for each element. ³ Id. The technical capability factor would be significantly more important than cost/price. [*4]  Id.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.