About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


B-421008.4 Feb 23, 2023 1 (2023-02-23)

handle is hein.gao/gaoohe0001 and id is 1 raw text is: U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 441 G St. N.W. Comptroller General Washington, DC 20548 of the United States Decision Matter of: Arlluk Technology Solutions, LLC--Reconsideration File: B-421008.4 Date: February 23, 2023 Devin E. Hewitt, Esq., Potomac Law Group, PLLC, for the requestor. Scott H. Riback, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request for reconsideration is denied where the request does not show that our earlier decision contained an error of fact or law, or present information not previously considered that would merit modification or reversal of our earlier decision. DECISION Arlluk Technology Solutions, LLC, of Chantilly, Virginia, requests reconsideration of our decision in ASRC Federal Data Solutions, LLC, B-421008, et al., Dec. 2, 2022, 2022 CPD ¶ 294, in which we sustained the protest of ASRC challenging the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) with Arlluk under request for quotations (RFQ) No. NIEHS-RFQ-22-6223146, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services for information technology services. Arlluk maintains that our prior decision contained errors of fact and law. Alternatively, Arlluk requests that we modify our prior recommendation for corrective action. We deny the request for reconsideration. Among other things, ASRC's protest challenged the issuance of the BPA to Arlluk on the grounds that the firm's quotation included a material misrepresentation relating to the availability of two key personnel. We sustained ASRC's protest, finding with respect to one of the two key personnel--identified in our decision as Dr. B--that Arlluk had misrepresented the availability of the individual in question; that the agency had relied on Arlluk's misrepresentation; and that the agency's reliance had a material effect on its evaluation of quotations and eventual source selection decision. In light of our conclusion, we sustained ASRC's protest, and recommended that the agency remove Arlluk from further participation in the competition.