• LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

+1-703-556-0411

Bid Protest Weekly
  • Home
  • Bid Protest Ed Center
    • WHAT is a bid protest?
    • WHO can file a bid protest
    • WHY Should you file a bid protest?
    • WHEN Must you file a bid protest?
    • WHERE can you file a bid protest?
    • READING the RFP
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

Matter of MCI Diagnostic Center, LLC

  • By GCPC GovCon Legal Team
  • April 8, 2020
  • Sole-Source Award
  • 0 Comments

Matter of MCI Diagnostic Center, LLC

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Disposition: Protest Denied

Decided: March 11, 2020

Keywords: Sole-Source Award

General Counsel P.C. Highlight: An agency may solicit from one source if the contracting officer reasonably determines that only one source is reasonably available.

Summary of Facts 

MCI Diagnostic Center, LLC (MCI) protests the issuance of a sole-source purchase order to Quest Diagnostics, Inc. (Quest) by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for t-spot interferon gamma release assay (IGRA) tuberculosis testing services. On August 20, 2019, the VA posted a sources-sought notice on the System for Award Management (SAM) website to identify sources for a potential procurement of testing services for the Southeast VA Health Care System in New Orleans.

On August 21, 2019, MCI responded to the notice, providing a capability statement, a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) certification, and a College of American Pathologists (CAP) accreditation. The capability statement stated that MCI was capable of performing reference laboratory testing services and had the laboratories and vendor resources to provide these services.

On September 5, 2019, the VA issued RFQ No. 36C25619Q1470 as a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) set-aside seeking a particular t-spot tuberculosis test that was proprietary to Oxford Immunotec, USA (Oxford). Oxford was performing the testing services pursuant to an order issued under its Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract, which was set to expire at the end of September. On September 26, 2019, the VA cancelled the solicitation and issued another 3-month order for tuberculosis testing services under Oxford’s FSS contract. Quest purchased Oxford’s North American laboratory, and the VA modified the order to reflect that Quest would perform the services. 

On November 26, 2019, the VA posted another sources-sought notice, again seeking information to enable it to conduct market research to identify potential sources for tuberculosis testing. The notice included a justification for a single-source award, which stated that the agency intended to make a sole-source award to Quest for tuberculosis testing. On December 6, 2019, MCI filed a protest challenging the agency’s decision to award a sole-source contract to Quest. On January 6, 2020, the VA filed a notice of corrective action and explained that it had issued a 3-month sole-source “bridge contract” to Quest to provide testing services from January 1, 2020 through March 31, 2020 during the pendency of the current protest and implementation of corrective action.

Basis of Protest 

MCI argued that the 3-month bridge contract awarded to Quest was improper because the VA failed to demonstrate that there was only one source reasonably available.  It argued that it was available to meet the requirements for the testing and therefore, the agency could not justify a sole-source contract to Quest.

The VA argued that its award was reasonable because it can make a sole-source award where the requirement “is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the government would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits proposals.” The VA argued the award was proper under FAR part 13, because Quest was the only contractor that could provide the required services on an ongoing basis without unacceptable delay and disruption and a significant adverse impact to the agency.

Protest Denied

GAO explained that the simplified acquisition procedures established under FAR part 13 are designed “to promote efficiency and economy in contracting, and to avoid unnecessary burdens for agencies and contractors where, as here, the value of the acquisition is less than $150,000.” An agency “may solicit from one source if the contracting officer determines that the circumstances of the contract action deem only one source reasonably available (e.g., urgency, exclusive licensing agreements, brand-name or industrial mobilization).” Protests of sole-source determinations are reviewed under a “reasonableness” standard.

The VA stated that the New Orleans VA Medical Center had an “urgent and compelling need” for the tuberculosis testing services to avoid a break in services and the award to Quest was meant to be a 3-month bridge contract “to maintain the status quo and place a short-term bridge contract into effect to maintain critical supplies and services.”

GAO determined that the VA demonstrated a reasonable basis for awarding the 3-month contract to Quest consistent with FAR § 13.106-1(b)(1). The VA determined that Quest, as the incumbent, was the only source reasonably available to meet the urgent tuberculosis testing requirement and that MCI was not capable or authorized by the test manufacturer to immediately begin performing the tests.

The CLIA certification and CAP accreditation only demonstrated that MCI can meet and exceed industry standards for clinical laboratory testing, but there was no agreement between MCI and Oxford authorizing MCI to perform the testing. Thus, GAO determined that MCI had not shown that it was readily available to perform the required tuberculosis testing and had not shown that the agency’s determination that there is only one reasonably available source was unreasonable.

GAO denied the protest on this basis.

Tagged

Department of Veterans AffairsSole-Source AwardSolicitation RequirementsSource

Share

Related Posts

Matter of Wamore, Inc.

November 13, 2019

Womack Machine Supply Co., B-407990, May 3, 2013

May 15, 2013

Unitron LP, B-406770, August 14, 2012

October 3, 2012

Camden Shipping Corporation, B-406171, B-406323, February 27, 2012

March 7, 2012

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Search Bid Protest Weekly

Download our Bid Protest Primer FREE eBook!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Categories

  • 8(a) Sole Source Awards
  • Acknowledging Amendments
  • Adequately Written Proposal
  • Adverse Agency Action
  • Adverse Impact Analysis
  • Agency Tender
  • Alternate or Previously-Approved Product
  • Ambiguity in Solicitation
  • Attorney's Fees
  • Bad Faith in Evaluation
  • Below-Cost Offer
  • Best Value
  • Beyond the Scope
  • Bias
  • Bid and Proposal Costs
  • Bid Bond
  • Bid Compliance
  • Bid Protest Decisions
  • Bid Protest Jurisdiction
  • Bid Protests
  • Bidding Best Practices
  • Blanket Purchase Agreement
  • Blanket Purchase Order
  • Blog Articles
  • Bona Fide Needs Rule
  • Brand Name or Equal
  • Broad Agency Announcement
  • Brooks Act
  • Bundling or Consolidation
  • Buy American Act
  • Cancellation of a Solicitation
  • Capability of Contractor
  • CCR Registration
  • Certificate of Competency (COC)
  • Certification Requirements
  • Changes Clause
  • Clarifications
  • Clear and Convincing Evidence
  • Clearly Meritorious Protest
  • Clerical Error
  • Commercial Item Acquisition
  • Competitive Range
  • Compliance
  • Conflict of Interest
  • Construction Design-Build
  • Construction Services
  • Contract Administration
  • Contract Modifications
  • Contracting Preference
  • Contractor Responsibility
  • Corporate Capability
  • Corrective Action
  • Cost Accounting System
  • Cost Evaluation
  • Cost Realism
  • Cost Reimbursement Contract
  • Cost-Technical Trade-Off
  • Customary Commercial Practice
  • CVE
  • DCAA Audit
  • Debriefing
  • Default Termination
  • Deficient Price Proposal
  • Delivery Order jurisdiction
  • Delivery Schedule
  • Designated Employee Agent
  • Disclosure of Price
  • Disclosure of Source Selection-Sensitive Information
  • Discussions
  • Disqualification
  • Documentation of Evaluation
  • Domestic Production Requirement
  • Education Center Articles
  • Electronic Filing
  • Evaluation Criteria
  • Evaluations
  • Events
  • Executive Order Compliance
  • Experience of Contractor
  • Experience Requirement
  • Fair Market Price
  • FedBizOpps
  • Federal Prison Industries (FPI)
  • Filing Deadlines
  • Final Evaluation
  • Final Proposal Revisions
  • Financial Responsibility
  • Fixed Price Contract
  • Former Government Employees
  • FSS Contract
  • GAO Bid Protest Review
  • GAO Jurisdiction
  • GAO Standard of Review
  • Government Contracts
  • Government Office Closings
  • Government Surplus Material
  • GSA Lease
  • HUBZone
  • ID/IQ
  • In-Sourcing
  • Incentive Fee
  • Inclement Weather Delay
  • Incomplete Proposal
  • Incorporation by Reference
  • Incumbent Capture
  • Incumbent Status
  • Independent Government Estimate (IGE)
  • Individual Environmental Report
  • Industrial Mobilization
  • Innovations
  • Interested Party
  • Invitation for Bid
  • Invited Contractor
  • Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act
  • Joint Venture
  • Key Personnel
  • Labor Hours
  • Labor Rate Pricing
  • Late Proposals
  • Late Submissions
  • Level of Effort
  • Licensing Requirements
  • Limitation on Subcontracting
  • Liquidated Damages
  • Lost Proposal
  • Lowest Price Technically Acceptable
  • Mail-Box Rule
  • Management Planning
  • Market Research
  • MAS Contracts
  • Material Solicitation Amendment
  • Material Solicitation Terms
  • Meaningful Discussions
  • Micro-Purchase Threshold
  • Minimum Requirements
  • Misleading Discussions
  • Mistake
  • Mitigation Strategy
  • Multiple Awards
  • NAICS Code
  • National Security
  • Negotiation
  • News
  • Non-Procurement Instruments
  • Novations
  • Offeror Representations
  • OMB Circular A-76
  • Option Exercise
  • Oral Presentations
  • Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)
  • Page Limitations
  • Past Performance
  • Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)
  • Performance Based Standards
  • Permits and Responsibilities
  • Personal Conflicts of Interest
  • Post-Award Changes to the Contract
  • Post-Protest Re-Evaluations
  • Practicable Alternative
  • Pre-Award Protest
  • Pre-award vs. Post-award Requirements
  • Pre-Qualification of Offerors
  • Prejudice
  • Price Calculation Error
  • Price Calculation Error
  • Price Evaluation
  • Price of FSS Task Order Quote
  • Price Realism
  • Price Reasonableness
  • Price Reduction
  • Procurement Announcement
  • Procurement Integrity
  • Product Testing
  • Proposal Acceptance Period
  • Proposal Detail
  • Proposal Evaluation
  • Proposal Extension
  • Proposal Standards
  • Proposals
  • Protest Jurisdiction
  • Protest Terms of Solicitation
  • Protester Comments
  • Public-Private Competition
  • Randolph-Sheppard Act (RSA)
  • Rate Tenders
  • Re-Certification of Size Status
  • Reconsideration
  • Reevaluation
  • Reevaluation Standards
  • Reimbursement of Protest Costs
  • Rejection of Proposal
  • Relaxation or Waiver of Requirement
  • Relevancy of Past Performance
  • Reliance on the Proposal
  • Remedies
  • Requirements Contract
  • Responsibility
  • Responsiveness
  • Restricted Competition
  • Resumes
  • Revision of Proposal
  • Revision of Proposals
  • Risk
  • Rule of Two
  • SBA Status protest
  • SDVOSB Set-Asides
  • Significant Issue Exception
  • Simplified Acquisition Procedures
  • Site Visit
  • Size Determination
  • Size Protest
  • Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program
  • Small Business Set-Asides
  • Small Business Subcontracting Goals
  • Sole-Source Award
  • Solicitation Amendment
  • Solicitation Requirements
  • Source Approval
  • Source Selection Authority
  • Source Selection Decision
  • Source Selection Plan
  • Sources Sought Notice
  • Staffing Plan
  • State and Local Requirements
  • Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA)
  • Subcontract Protest
  • Subcontractor Experience
  • Suspension and Debarment
  • Taking Exception to RFP Requirements
  • Task Orders
  • Teaming Agreement
  • Technical Acceptability
  • Technical Evaluation
  • Termination of Award
  • Terms of the Solicitation
  • Timeliness of Protest
  • Timely Filing
  • Timely Performance
  • Timely Proposal Submission
  • Trade Agreement Act
  • Unbalanced Pricing
  • Unduly Restrictive Terms
  • Unequal Access to Information
  • Unequal Treatment of Offerors
  • Uniform Time Act of 1996
  • Unstated Evaluation Criteria
  • Unusual and Compelling Urgency
  • Use of Appropriated Funds
  • Veterans First
  • VIP Database
  • VOSB Set Asides
  • Wage Determination

Get Help


Talk to an
attorney who
specializes
in bid protests:

+1-703-556-0411
Email

Keep up to date
on bid protest
decisions and
policies:

© 2021 Bid Protest Weekly

  • LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Home
  • Bid Protest Ed Center
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Bid Protest Ed Center
    • WHAT is a bid protest?
    • WHO can file a bid protest
    • WHY Should you file a bid protest?
    • WHEN Must you file a bid protest?
    • WHERE can you file a bid protest?
    • READING the RFP
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

+1-703-556-0411