Decisions Released: US Air Force Combined Air and Space Center Operations Center (CAOC) Communications Support protest sustainment

Two recent decisions are included below.

B-423197, B-423197.4

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposed professional compensation plans is sustained where the record does not demonstrate that the agency conducted an evaluation in accordance with the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 52.222-46.
2. Protest that the agency unreasonably evaluated technical proposals is denied where the record demonstrates that the evaluation was consistent with the solicitation and procurement law.
3. Protest that the agency failed to analyze price risk in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement provision 252.204-7024 is sustained where the record does not contain the required price risk report.
4. Protest that the agency failed to analyze the performance risk posed by the awardee’s low price is denied where the solicitation did not put offerors on notice that the agency would conduct a price realism analysis of total price.

Discussion

SMS contends that the Air Force unreasonably evaluated the professional employee compensation plans; as explained below, we agree with the protester and sustain the protest on that basis. We deny the allegation that the agency unreasonably evaluated technical proposals. We sustain the allegation that the Air Force failed to conduct the analysis required under DFARS provision 252.204-7024. Lastly, we deny the allegation that the agency failed to evaluate the performance risk posed by the awardee’s low price …

Decision

SMS Data Products Group, Inc., of McLean, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Trace Systems Inc., of Vienna, Virginia, under fair opportunity proposal request (FOPR) RS3-23-0047, issued by the Department of the Air Force for Combined Air and Space Center Operations Center (CAOC) communications support for the U.S. Air Forces Central Command. SMS argues that the Air Force unreasonably evaluated professional employee compensation plans, that the agency’s evaluation of technical proposals was unreasonable, that the agency failed to conduct a price risk analysis required by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and that the agency failed to assess the performance risk posed by the awardee’s low price.

We sustain the protest.

Read the decision here.

File: B-423197.2; B-423197.3; B-423197.5

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposed professional compensation plans is sustained where the record does not demonstrate that the agency conducted an evaluation in accordance with the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 52.222-46.
2. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the realism of non-professional direct labor rates is sustained where the evaluation does not conform to the solicitation and procurement law and regulation and lacks a reasonable basis.
3. Protest asserting that the agency failed to analyze price risk in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement provision 252.204-7024 is sustained where the record does not contain the required price risk report.
4. Protest that the awardee had unmitigable unequal access to information organizational conflicts of interest is denied when the awardee had unremarkable, periodic social interactions with a former government official, and where the alleged improper sharing of confidential information by former employees of protester’s subcontractor was a private dispute between parties without agency involvement.
5. Protest that agency conducted misleading discussions is denied where the protester fails to allege improper conduct on the part of the agency and the allegation is, in essence, a challenge to the reasonableness of the price evaluation.
6. Protest that the agency unreasonably evaluated protester’s technical proposal is denied where the record demonstrates that the evaluation was consistent with the solicitation and procurement law.

Discussion

MicroTech asserts that the Air Force unreasonably evaluated Trace’s professional employee compensation plan and the realism of Trace’s proposed non-professional direct labor rates. As explained below, we sustain the protest on both bases. The protester also contends that the agency failed to conduct a price risk analysis of Trace’s proposal required by the DFARS; the record does not contain the required price risk analysis, and we also sustain the protest on that basis. Lastly, MicroTech argues that Trace has unmitigable OCIs, that the agency’s conduct of discussions was misleading, and that the agency unreasonably evaluated MicroTech’s technical proposal; we deny those allegations …

Decision

MicroTechnologies LLC, of Delray Beach, Florida, protests the issuance of a task order to Trace Systems Inc., of Vienna, Virginia, under fair opportunity proposal request (FOPR) RS3-23-0047, issued by the Department of the Air Force for Combined Air and Space Center Operations Center (CAOC) communications support for the U.S. Air Forces Central Command. The protester asserts that the Air Force unreasonably evaluated professional employee compensation plans, unreasonably evaluated the realism of non-professional direct labor rates, and failed to conduct a price risk analysis required by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS). MicroTech further asserts that Trace has unmitigable organizational conflicts of interest (OCIs), the agency’s conduct of discussions was misleading, and the agency unreasonably evaluated MicroTech’s technical proposal.

We sustain the protest.

Read the decision here.

🔊 Listen to Story