Brian A Jackson | Shutterstock

The protester objected to the cancellation of a solicitation. The protester argued the timing of the cancellation was improper because the agency had already established BPAs when it made the cancellation decision. GAO, however, opined that the timing of the cancellation was irrelevant, reasoning that “sometimes wisdom comes late.” An agency may cancel a solicitation when its requirements change, and it doesn’t matter when the information supporting cancellation surfaces.

Meridian Knowledge Solutions, LLC, GAO B-420150.4 et al.

Background

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued an RFQ seeking information technology services supporting the agency’s learning management software. DHS uses the software to analyze training needs and gaps in staff. The RFQ contemplated the establishment of multiple blanket purchase agreements.

After evaluating quotations, DHS established BPAs with three vendors. A disappointed vendor, Meridian Knowledge Solutions, protested, alleging that DHS had improperly issued BPAs of varying lengths. GAO sustained the protest, finding that the BPAs with varying lengths conflicted with the RFQ. In response to the GAO decision, DHS indicated that it would take corrective action to reassess its needs and either amend the solicitation or issue a new solicitation.

After reconsidering its requirements, DHS concluded that it needed a solution authorized by the FedRAMP Joint Authorization Board at the FedRAMP moderate level or higher. DHS determined that the best method for satisfying this requirement would be an interagency agreement (IAA) with  the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). DHS canceled the RFQ and notified vendors it was going to procure its needs through an IAA. Meridian filed another protest challenging the cancellation decision.

Analysis

Cancellation of RFQ

Meridian alleged the cancellation was unreasonable because the agency really didn’t require FedRAMP moderation. DHS had identified a couple of recent cybersecurity incidents—e.g., SolarWinds—which caused the agency to reconsider its needs. But Meridian contended these incidents predated the establishing of BPAs, so the cancellation must have been pretextual.

But GAO noted that even if DHS should have determined its needs for enhanced cybersecurity sooner, it was irrelevant. An agency may properly cancel a solicitation no matter when the information supporting cancellation surfaces, even if discovered during the court of protest. As GAO noted, “sometimes wisdom comes late.” The fact that the agency realized it needed to cancel later than Meridian would’ve preferred gave GAO no basis to question the decision.

Also, Meridian contended the cancellation was a pretext to avoid competing the requirement and excluding Meridian from the competition. This didn’t make a difference. If a cancellation decision is reasonably supported by a change in the agency’s requirements, the fact that the decision may have been motivated by another inappropriate reason provides no basis to protest.

Authority for IAA

Meridian further alleged that DHS lacked statutory authority to enter an IAA with OPM. GAO disagreed. DHS cited 5 U.S.C. § 1304(e) as authority for the IAA. That provision creates a revolving fund for OPM to finance personnel training at the request of other agencies. The services DHS sought were unquestionably training services related to management. The use of IAA was consistent with OPM’s statutory authority.

Meridian is represented by Lucas T. Hanback, Eleanor M. Ross, Alexandria Tindall Webb, and Cindy Lopez of Rogers Joseph O’Donnell PC. The agency is represented by Roger A. Hipp and Matthew D. McKenzie of the Department of Homeland Security. GAO attorneys Michael Willems and Evan Wesser participated in the preparation of the decision.