Chaedrol GAO Protest Log 20240920: Radiance, Gemini Tech

Radiance Technologies, Inc. (B-422615)

You should not care.

Category: Task Order Competition, size status recertification

Date: August 30, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422615

### Key Issues The protest by Radiance Technologies challenged the task order solicitation requirement mandating offerors to recertify their small business status. The protester argued that this requirement was unduly restrictive and not authorized by law, asserting that the contracting officer lacked the authority to impose recertification under the existing regulations. GAO analyzed the agency's discretion under SBA regulations, confirming that the requirement for recertification was permissible and consistent with the purpose of ensuring small businesses are awarded contracts.

The protest was denied, because the GAO determined that the agency's actions were within its authority, and the recertification requirement was not unduly restrictive of competition. This case reinforces the agency’s discretion to request size certifications at the task order level, ensuring that contracts intended for small businesses are awarded to firms that meet this status at the time of proposal submission.

Digest

Protest challenging task order solicitation requirement for offerors to recertify their small business status is denied where the recertification requirement was within the agency's discretion and where the protester failed to demonstrate that the agency's actions were otherwise unreasonable.

Gemini Tech Services, LLC (B-422620)

You should not care.

Category: Task Order Competition

Date: September 5, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422620

Gemini Tech Services protested the agency's decision to include the eventual awardee in the competitive range, arguing it was unreasonable and inconsistent with the solicitation’s terms. Additionally, they challenged the agency's cost realism evaluation. GAO upheld the agency's decision, stating that the agency acted within its discretion as outlined in the solicitation and FAR provisions. GAO found the agency's evaluation and competitive range determination reasonable, and the protester's claims did not demonstrate competitive prejudice.

The protest was denied.

Digest

1. Protest challenging agency's decision to include eventual awardee in the competitive range is denied where the decision was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.

2. Protest challenging agency's cost realism evaluation is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria.