Decision Released: DLA SAP IT Services protest dismissal

File: B-422901.2

Digest

1. Protest challenging terms of the solicitation as unduly restrictive of competition and contention that protester was improperly eliminated from consideration as a qualified source are dismissed as untimely.
2. Protest alleging agency acted in bad faith is dismissed for failing to set forth a factually sufficient basis of protest.

Discussion

The protester raises a variety of challenges to what it characterizes as the agency’s unfair treatment “and [b]ias or [f]avoritism in favor of” the awardee. Protest at 1. In large part, ACES re-raises the same contentions included in the vendor’s pre‑award protest regarding the solicitation’s unduly restrictive requirements, the insufficiency of the agency’s limited sources justification, and the unreasonableness of DLA eliminating ACES as a qualified source. Compare id. at 1-2 with AR, Exh. 5, ACES Pre-Award Protest at 1. Referencing DLA’s August 28th email that advised ACES “this RFQ is for DOD ESI vendors,” the protester asserts ACES was “eliminated as a qualified source without providing any legitimate basis.” Protest at 2; see also AR, Exh. 5, ACES Pre‑Award Protest at 2, 11, unnumbered attach., Email Exchange between DLA and ACES, Aug. 28, 2024. The protester contends this email represents “[t]he unwarranted addition of restrictive requirements not contained in the RFQ resulting in a lack of competition, determination that ACES was not a qualified source, along with unfair and unequal treatment resulting in wrongful bias and favoritism on the part of …

Decision

Alamo City Engineering Services, Inc. (ACES), of Spring Branch, Texas, protests the issuance of an order to Advantaged Solutions, Inc., of Washington, District of Columbia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP4701-24-Q-0159, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for brand name information technology (IT) services. The protester contends the solicitation included unduly restrictive requirements, that the awardee was pre-selected, and that the agency failed to give serious evaluation consideration to ACES’s quotation.

We dismiss the protest.

Read the decision here.

🔊 Listen to Story