Free Administrative Record - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 1 of 30

Accounbabllity * Inleg~'lty - Reliability

Comptroller General o1" the United States

United States Government Accountability Office Washington, DC 20548

Decision
Matter of-. File: The Ravens Group, Inc. B-296741.4

Date: DECISION

April 17, 2006

The Ravens Group, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Rowe Contracting Services, Inc. by the Defense Intelligence Agency under solicitation HHM402-05-R0017. We view the protest as academic because the agency has decided to reconsider the award decision.
The jurisdiction of our Office is established by the bid protest provisions of the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3551-3556 (2000), amended by the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, Pub. L. No. 108-375, § 326, 118 Stat. 1811 (2004). Our role in resolving bid protests is to ensure that the statutory requirements for full and open competition are met. Pacific Photocopy and Research Servs., B-278698, B-278698.3, Mar. 4, 1998, 98-1 CPD ¶ 69 at4.

The Government Accountability Office will not consider a protest where the issue presented has no practical consequences with regard to an existing federal government procurement, and. thus is of purely academic interest. Accordingly, the protest is dismissed. Anthony H. Gamboa General Counsel ~'

Protected Information To Be Disclosed Only In Accordance With United States Court of Federal Claims Protective Order

181

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB CONTRACTING ACTIVITY Filed VA Document 15-9 APR-O9-2006 20:28 From:Patrick/Henry LLP

709 256"7883

05/12/2007 Page 2 of 30 P.O04 04/05/2~05 1~:4~ #!~ F.UUZ

PATRI, CKiHENRY~

7619 Litlle River Turnpike
Suite 340

Annandale, VA 2~003 Tel; 703A~G,7754
Fax: 703.256.7883

PROTECTED MATERIAL: ' TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMEI~" ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER April 6,2006 VIA U.S. MAIL & FA,CSIMILE Office of the General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20548

~dmitt~rd ;n V~. D~

Attention:
Re:

Procurement Law Control Group
Protest of the Ravens Group, Inc. Under. Request for Proposal No. HHM402-05-R-0017 Defense Intelligence A~ency

in roD, DC T~ Islands. Ghana

Dear Ms. Curcio)~~ The Ravens Group, Inc, ("Ravens Group"), 9901 Business Park~vay~ First Floor, Suite H, Lanham, Maryland 20706, by its undersigned counsel. hereby protesls the Defense Intelligence Agency's ("DIA" or "Agency") proposed revocation of its award to the Ravens Group of a contract pursuant to Request for Proposal No. HHM402-05-R-0017 and award of this requi rement to Rowe Contracting Services, Inc. ("Rowe"). The Ravens Group's telephone number is 301.577.8585 and its facsimile number is 301.577.9097. The ContractingOfficer for this procurement is Guy A. Torrcs, Virginia Contracting Activity, 200 MacDil[ Boulevard, Building 6000, Boiling Air

USPTO

admitted in D~.. NY. ~A

5900 Princess Garden P~rkway Suite 640 Lanham, MD 20706

Force Base, Washington, D.C. 20340-5100. The Contracting Officer's ~elephone number is 202.231,8077 and his facsimile number is 202.23.1.283 I. A copy of this protest is being sent via facsimile and overnight mail to the Contracting Officer. The Ravens Group first learned of some of the information upon which this Protest is based, including the prejudice to the Ravens Group~ on March 27, 2006; the Ravens Group learned of additional information upon which this Protest is based on April 3, 2006. Becaus.e this protest is being filed within ~en (10) days of the Ravens Group's notice of these bases of the Protest, the Protest is timely filed. 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(2) (2006).

www.patrickhenry, net

182

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 3 of 30

PAFR ICK HENRY :'General Aec0unhabilitY Office
April 6. 2006 Page 2 Rowe, ~he purported new awardee, has engaged in improper conduct and thereby should be disqualified from participation in this procurement action. Specifically, Rowe paid employees of the Ravens Group m provide it information regarding the Ravens Group. In addition, Rowe has inexplicably and unlawfully obtained confidential information regarding the Ravens Group proposal. 1. BACKGROUND A. [lolling Air Force Base JanitoriallCustodia! Services RFP

DIA issued RFP No. HHM402-05-R-0017 "t'orjanitorial/custodiai services at its t:acil.ity located on Boiling Air Force Base on April 14, 2005 (the "Contract"). Among other significant requirements, the RFP required the successful offeror to have at least twenty percent (20%) of its personnel cleared with a top secret .clearance with access lo Special Compartmented Information ("TS-SCI') prior to award and a minimum of sixty percent (60%) ~f its personnel Cleared with a top secret clearance within six months after contract award. See RFP. p. 6. As a result of the terrorist at~,cks of September ! !. 2001, and an overhaul of security requirements, the demand for cleared personnel has increased enormously and reccuitmem of such personnel has become extremely difficult and expensi,e. In accordance with the evaluation criteria of the RFP, award of the contract was to be made to "'the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the "'best value to the Government." .See RFP, p. 40. By awarding lhe Contract to the Ravens Group on June 28, 2005, DIA presumably determined that the Ravens Group provided the "best overall value to the Government" as w~ required by the RFP.

DIA Delayed Notic~ of the Protest of the Original Award to Ravens .Group The Ravens Group b~gan performance under the Contrac~ on or about July I, 2005. By mail. dated August 11, 2005, DIA issued the Ravens Group a Contract modification, noti F.ving the Ravens Group for the first time of DIA's intent to re-evaluate "all technical proposals under the referenced Request for Proposals." Significantly, the email did not notify the Ravens Group that a protest had been filed or the b~sis for DIA's determination that reevaluation was necessary.
By reply email, dated August 15. 2005, the Ravens Group questioned the basis for the Contract modification and the lack of any prior notice of any issues or concerns in connection with the original 'award of the Contract. In an undated communication to the Ravens Group, PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

www.patrickhenry.net

183

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 4 of 30

Froa:Patrick/Henry LLP

708 256 788a

!R tCK, HENRY
General Accountability Office April 6, 2006 Page 3

received by the Ravens Group August 30, 2005, DIA notified the Ravens Group for the first time of the protest of the original Contract award to the Ravens Group.
Rowe Paid Ravens Group Employccs :for Information

On March 23, 2006, DIA notified the Ravens Group that it had determined to terminate .the Ravens Group's Contract on the ground that it had determined that Rowe now presented the best value to the Government. DIA's notice advised the Ravens Group that its contract would terminate April 1, 2006.
Beginning March 27, 2006, DIA allowed Scott Rowe, President of Rowe a.nd his representatB, es on to the secured facility and allowed them to begin to interview the Ravens Group's employees. Also on March 27tl'. Milton Grant, the Ravens Group Director of" Facilities Management and Security, participated in a discussion ~vith Scott Rowe, during which, m Mr. Grant's surprise: Mr. Rowe advised Mr. Crran~ of the following: 1) Rowe had bid approximately $3.000,000 overall less than the Ravens Group; and 2) that the reason Rowe originally lost the bid was that Rowe had not "'submitted a work schedule" that the Raveris Group had submiIted. On April 3. 2006, Mr. Rowe essentially repeated the above in front of'other witnesses and also stated that he had reviewed information regarding Ravens Group employees on JPAS, a confidential networkfor monitoring security clearaaces. SeeStatements of Milton Grant and :left Robertson, enclosed.

On March 31,2006, DI.A determined that, pursuant, to the automatic stay provisions of ~he protest procedures, the Ravens Group would be permitted to continue its performance of the contract pending a decision in the Protest. On April 3, 2006, Ernest Fields, one of the Ravens Group's Project Managers on the DIA Contract, upon questioning by Milton Grant, the Ravens Group Director of Facilities Management and Security, admitted that Scott Rowe, Rowe's £resident, had paid him and Wcndy Scott, another Ravens Group employee, $500.00 to prmzide Rowe information regarding Ravens Group "employees and the working and scheduling" of the Ravens Group's contract effort during the pendcncy of the Ravens Group's Protest. On April 5, 2006. Wendy Scott, the other Ravens Group Project Manager on the DIA Contract, also admitted that Mr. Rowe had paid her $500.00.

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSI~D ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER
w.ww.patrickhenry.n et

184

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 5 of 30

~.UUf

04/06/2006 16:47 #188 P.00B

General Accountability Office April 6, 2006 Page 4 II, BASIS OF PROTEST

DIA Provided the Rowe an Unfair Competitive vis-a-vis the Ravens Group by Allowing Rowe Officials on the DIA Facility and Access to the Ravens Group Employees and Work Space During the Pendcncy of a Prior Protest Beginning March 27, 2006, DIA allowed Rowe ofiq~eials unescorted access to the DIA facility at which the Ravens Group was performing the Contract. This improper access occurred during the pendency of a Protest filed by the Ravens Group, Accordingly, on information and belief, Rowe had access to Ravens Group confidential company information and its employees. In addition, as noted above and in the statement prepared by Mr. Grant, Rowe apparently did obtain confidential information regarding the Ravens Group, including information regarding the Ravens Grot~p's employees, its staffing and scheduling methodology. Thus~ the new source selection review contemplated in this procurement action would be highly prejudicial and unfair to the Ravens Group. Rowe Paid Ravens Group Employees for Information During the Pendency of the Ravens Group's Protest
The Court of Federal Claims has previously approved the disqualification of a company for using unfair or improper methods of obtaining information about a competitor. In Compliance Corp., v. United States, 22 CI. Ct. 193 (1990), affd, 960 F.2d (Fed. Cir. 1992), the Court sustained the contracting officer's disqualification of the contractor after it was revealed that the contractor approached employees of the incumbent contractor, who was competing for a follow on contract, to obtain information regarding how the incumbent p'erformed the work. In this case, Ravens Group employees have ~mitted that Rowe approached them and p~.id them cash for information during the pendency of the Ravens Group's Protest. The Court stated in Compliance COT.

The court finds actual or attempted "industrial espionage'" to be outside the realm of normal business practices, and the contracting officer is entitled to disqualify those who engage in such conduct, not only to protect the integrity o'f the contracting process, but also to deter others from similar conduct.
See also Litton SEs., inc., B-234060, 89-1 CPD ¶ 450, recons, denied 89-2 CPD ~ 228.

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOL~TABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE.ORDER www.patdckhenry.net 185

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 6 of 30

M.UUB

04/06/2006 16:47 #188 P.006

D\[]<. 1"" -' RY -. [<. HEN
General Accountability Office April 6.. 2006 Page 5 CRowe has Obtained Confidential Information ofthe Ravens Group

As discussed above, and in Mr. Groin's statement, Scott Rowe, the President of Rowe, has bragged about his ability to obtain information regarding the Ravens Group. Further, he has admitted to possessing information regarding the Ravens Group propOsal, and the Ravens Group:s scheduling methodologies and practices. Mr. Rmx'e obtained this information during the procurement process. Rowe's possession of this information is highly prejudicial to tile Ravens Group and prevents a fair review of the Ravens Group in any subsequent review of this procurelr~ent action.

CONCL,~S~ON
The Ravens Group requesls a ruling on its protest by the Comptroller General of the United States that DIA's decision to revoke award to the Ravens Group and award the Contrac~ to another contractor is in violation of the RFP, and Federal law, including the FAR. The Ravens Group therefore respectfully requests that the Comptroller General recommend the disqualification of Rowe and that: D1A reverse its decision to revoke the Contract Award to the Ravens Group and reinstate the Ravens Group; and Pay the Ravens Group its attorneys fees and other costs incurred in pursuing this protest.

In the altemativ4, the Ravens Group requests that the Comptroller General recommend that: 1. DIA issue a new solicitation and begin this procurement action again;
or

DIA pay the Ravens Group its bid costs for preparing and submitting its proposal pursuant to the above-referenced RFP, including its submissions following the August 2005 Contract amendment; and Pay the Ravetts Gronp i~s legal fees and other costs incurred in pursuing this protest.

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

. www.patrickhenry.net

186

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 7 of 30

U4/U~IZUU~ ~:4~ ~I~ r.UU!

~.UU~

General Accountability Office April 6, 2006 Page 6
¯ Iv. DISC_QVERY RE, GUEST The Ravens Group requests that DIA produce the following documents:l 1. .~l! documents evidencing or reflecting the original protest of the award to the Ravens Group, including the original protest letter, the contracting officer's statement, legal opiniolx the agency report, and any other communication regarding the origi~nal protest. All documents evidencing or reflecting the technical evaluation of the Ravens Group and the other offcrors. All documents evidencing or reflecting the basis for DIA's original decision to award the Contract to the Ravens Group and its subsequent decision to award to Rowe. All documents upon which the DIA relied in evaluating the Ravens Group and the other offerors. All documents evidencing or reflecting DIA's evaluation of the capabilities of the Ravens Group and the other offerors. All documents evidencing or reflecting DIA's consideration of the Ravens Group's past performance and experi'ence in making its award decision. All documents evidencing or reflecting DIA's consideration of the Ravens Group's price proposal in making its award decision. All Agency communications in cormection with the RFP. . 9. All documents relating to the Ravens Group and the awardees~ proposals, including but not limited to all internal agency correspondence~ memoranda and notes referring or relating to the RFP, including those relating to the proposals. The source selection plan, if any. Any and all other guidance provided to the evaluators, or referred to by them.

2, 3. 4. 5. 6, 7.

10. l 1.

t This request includes all information relating to DIA's original e~,aluatior~ which led ~_o the award to the Ravens Group as well a~ any subsequent evaluation relating to the dc~cn-nination to revoke the Ravens Group's award and award to Rowe.

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE.WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

www.patrickhenry, net

187

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 8 of 30

PAT R .I C .K HEN RY
General Ac'counTtabi|ity Office Apr!l 6, 2006 Page 7

REQUEST FOR HEARING..AND PROTECTIVE ORDER I~" the issues in this case can.not be resolved, on the basis of the documents requested, lhe' Ravens Group r~ucsts a hearing on all of the matters set forth herein. 4 C.F.R. § 21. l(d) (2006). The Ravens Group also requests that a protective order be issued in this prolest, Resp.ectfully submitted, PaIric~LLP

~-~--__~.__._C_Ct~o-T.-he-R-avk~1~Grou p, Inc.

Mr, Guy A. Tones Contracting Officer Virginia Contracting Activity Bo~ling Air Force Base

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

www, patrickhenry.net

188

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB CONTRACTING 15-9 Filed APR-US-~UU5 ZU:3U VA Document ACTIVITY From;Parr ick/Henry LLP 703 256 7883

05/12/2007

Page 9 of 30

GROUP INC.

R~vens

The

S-W-O-R-N S-T-A-T-E-M-E-N-T
This statement reflects a conversation that took pla~e on Monday, March 27, 2006, inside the Defense ~tellige~ac /A) at Bolling Air Force l~ase in Washington, DC. I, Milton ]ames Grant III ), was introduced to Scott E. Rowe, of Rowe Contracting Services I avens Group's Contracting Offices Technical R~resentative (COTR) Ms. Mary HcnnJgan. Scot1 introduced hJmaelfa~ the company's president. Sco~t and I talked about the fact that he was being awarded the custodial contract we curr.enfly possessed a~ a result of an earlier protest lodged by an ur&nown company..Scott th~n stazed that he had bid about $3,000,000.00 overall less tha~ we did for the contract, and the only reason he did zot win the original bid was because The Ravens Group submitted a work schedule sad he did not. I told Scott I understood his p0sttion and that business is business. Scott began to tell me how he had Mrs, Verleae Cameron (The previous company's Project Manager) in his pocket feeding him information. Scott then stated he knew of our company in great detail. He stated that initially he thought ofprote~ting the original contract but decided against it not wanting to incur what he feIt woutd have been unnecessary legal fees. He stated he received a phone call some six monr.b.s later inviting him to submit his bid again if he was still interested in the contract. Scott stated that he bid about 1.5 million a year less than The Ravens Group did on the contract. The following week, on Monday, April 3, 2006, in the DIA cafeteria, in due presence of the corapar~y's Executive Vice President; Jeff Robertson, Scott again stated he had bid about 1.5 million a year less than The Ravens Group, and had also reviewed several of our employees via £PAS, the network for monitoring security clearances,

O-F ¯ S-T-A-T-E-M-E-N-T

Facilities Management and Security The Ravens Group ~c. 9901 Business Parkway Suite H Laaha~ MD 20706 Tel: 301-577-8585 Fax: 301-577-9097

189

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB CONTRACTING ACTIVITY Document 15-9 APR-09-2006 20:30 VA

Fron]:Patrick/Henry LLP

703 256 /883

Filed 05/12/2007 P.OI2 Page 10 of 30

O4/Ob/~UOb 15:4~ #l~ V.OlU

GROUP INC.

S-W-O-R-N S-T-A-T-E-M-E-N-T
Tkis statement reflects a conversation that began on Monday, April 3, 2006, at my re d e; 4720 Lauriefrost Court, Alexandria, Virginia. I, Milton James Grant III 1 0 ), had engaged in a conversation with Ernest L. Fields, a recently terminate empl e of The Ravens Group. I asked Ernest to confirm a rumor I heard involving him and Wendy Scott; the current Project Manager for the custodial contract at DIA both receiving.cash payment in the amount 0f$500.00 each from Scott R.owe, Prcsldent of P,.owe Contracting Services'Inc., in exchange for information on Ravens Group employees and the working and scheduling of the contract effort, Ernest stated that both he and Wendy Scott did in fact receive the $500.00 each from Scott Rowe in exchange for help and information to transition the contract from The Ravens Group to Rowe Contracting Services. According to Ernest Fields, this transaction took place on Tuesday, Mazch 28, 2006 for Wendy Scott and on Wednesday, March 29, 2006 for him. The following day, on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 in my office at the company headquarters at 9901 Business Parkway, Lanham, Maryland 20706, Ernest rcpea~ed words to the same . stating that Scott Rowe gave him and Wendy Scott $500.00 each in exchange for help and information. Ernest stated he returned his moncy to Scott in fcar of being set up.

O-F S-T-A-T-E-M-E-N-T

Facilities Management and Security The Ravens Group Inc. 9901 Bus~ess P~rlc'way Suite H Lanharn, MD 20706 Tel: 301-577-8595 Fax: 30l -577-9097 Ceil: 703-965-6594

190
TOTAL P.OI2

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

From:Patrick/Henry LLP

Document 15-9

708 256 7888

Filed 05/12/2007

04/]1/2006 ]6:28 #202 P,OOI

Page 11 of 30

Patrick Henry LLP 7619 Little River Turnpike
Suite 340

Annandale, Virginia 22003 (703) 256-7754
Fax: (703) 256-7883

FAX COVER SHEET
FROM: FAX No. PHONE No. Client/Matter: Date:

Daryle A. Jordan 703.256.7883 703.256.7754 The Ravens Group, Inc. April ll, 2006
NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover)* Eleven (l 1 )

DOCUMENTS
Redacted Copy of April 6, 2006, Protest Letter

PLEASE DELIVER TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION , NAME GAO ORGANIZATION

Major Peter H. Tran, Trial Attorney
LTC Joseph V. Treanor, IlI Mr. Jeff Robertson

Procurement Law Control Group U.S. Army Legal Services Agency Defense Intelligence Agency The Ravens Group

PHONE # 202.512.4788

FAX # 202.512.9749 703.696.1537 202.231.2821

703.696.2825 703.696.1537 301.577.8585

1301.577.9097

COMMENTS:

The March 27, 2006, Protest Letter does not contain protected material.

The information contained in this facsimile message is information protected by attorney-client and/or the attorney/work product privilege. It is intended on@for the use of the individual named above and the privileges are not waived by virtue of this having been sent by facsimile. If the person actually receiving this facsimile or an.v other reader of the fbcsimile is not the ! t 11 c n dlsD IblltlOn i;~l~~-~h~ ct~.munication is st'rictly prohibited. If you have r~ed this communication in error, ptease immeaiately notiJ~ us by telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via ~ZS. Postal Service.

191

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 12 of 30

From!Pa%r ick/Hen'r:~ LLP

703 256 7883

04/20/2006 13:51 #222 P.002

B~xTi\I.GKiHENRY~
!
!

PROTECTED MATERIAL TO BE DISCLOSED ONLV IN ACCORDANCE WITlt GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

7619 Little River Turnpike Suite 340 Annandale, VA 22003 Tel: 703.2S6.77S4 Fax: 703.256.7883

I

April 20, 2006
t

P,.ICHA~D E. PATRICK

"vIA FACSIMILE Office of the General Counsel U.S.-Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20548 Attention: " ""~"r. :',.. Ms. Mary G. Curcio Senior Attorney Procurement Law Control Group Supplemental Protest of The Ravens Group, lnc, B-296741.4 Defense Intelligence Algency

admitted in VA DC. "PA. MI

SH.,M~ON 1, THEODOP-.E-LE'~5 admitted in MD, DC NY, OH DARVLE A. JORDAN admitted in VA, DC, PA

Re:

Dear Ms. Curcio:
"ETHEL
US Virgin Islands, Chana

.2. The Ravens Group, Inc. ("Ravens Group") hereby files this protest as a Supplement to Protest No. B-296741.4, challenging the Defense Intelligence Agency's ("DIA") revocation of the award of a custodial/janitorial services contract to the Ravens Group and purported award of that contracl to Rowe -Gontracting Service, Inc. ("Rowe") under Request for Proposal No. HHM40205-R-0017 (the "RFP" or "Solicitation"). , ... The Ravens Group first learned of the information upon which this ¯ ~uppl~mental protest is based, including the prejudice to the Ravens Group, on April 14, 2006. This Protest is being filed within ten (10) days of the date the Ravens Group first learned of the basis for this supplemental protest, and is therefore timely. 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(2)(2006).'

,I.~ ..By~.letter~ dated April 17, 2006, GAO dismissed Protest No. B-296741.4, on the ground that DIA had previously agreed to take corrective action and reconsider its award decision. Thus, according to GAO, Protest No. B-296741.4 would be oF"purely academic interest." -Kow~:s a.ctions were highly improper and possibly unlawful. Further, if true, Rowe's actions constitute unfair and unethical business practices, which should disqualify Rowe from *~ontifi'uing to participate in this procurement action. We are therefore filing this supplemental :~rote;~t' to preserve the Ravens Group's rights under the Protest Rules, which require a protester ~o fil~ its claim within ten d~ys after it first learns of the information upon which the protest is based.:

5900 Princess Suite 640 Lanham, MD 20~06 Tel: 240.296.34BB Fax: 240,296.3487

192
www. patrickhen ry.net
04/20/2006 THU 14:02 [TX/RX NO g65g] ~002

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB FTom:Pat r ick/Henry LLP

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 13 of 30 ~d UUJ/ UUO

703 256 7888

04/20/2006 13:51 #222 P.O03

PATR.. IC K HENRY
General Accountability'0ffice April 20, 2006 Page 2

Io

SUPPLEMENTAL GROUNDS FOR PROTEST Rowe Improperly Obtained Privacy Information Regarding Ravens Group Personnel Currently Performing the DIA Contract and Used this Information to Tamper with the Security Clearances of Ravens Group Personnel

In our Apri.t 6, 2006, Protest letter, we notified the General Accountability Office ("GAG") ot2B0we~s dis.bursement of $500.00 cash payments to several Ravens Group employ~e~ toobtain infdrrnation regarding the Ravens Group during the pendency of the Ravens Group March 27, 2006, Protest (B-296741 ¯3). As discussed in the April 6th Protest letter, Scott Ro e, Rowe s President, made $500¯00 cash payments 1o two (2) Ravens Group managers to obtain mt'b~ation regagdmg the Ravens Group. He also boasted to Ravens Group officaals that he had0btamed inlbrmation regarding the Ravens Group, including information regarding the Ravens G~o.up's price proposal, technical proposal, starting methodologies, and other information which the Ravens Group considers to be company confidential and proprietary information. On April 14, 2006, Monica Belanger, ia Ravens Group employee, was informed by her Security,Manager.that a.,routine review of her Joint Personnel Adjudication System file ("JPAS')-" had revealed that she was employed by Rowe. This revelation surprised and greatly cortcemed Ms. :Belanger, because she had never worked for Rowe; had no knowledge of Rowe; and had not gi,~en her permission to Rowe to access or alter her security file. Following a brief investigation to determine whether any other Ravens Group personnel had been compromised, the Ravens Gr~. u~" learfi~d that Rowe had entered the JPAS and transferred all of the Ravens Group'~p6i'g6rinel'.to R6we. This was done without the Ravens Group's knowledge or authorization 0r the knowledge or authorization of the Ravens Group's personnel. Ro.we's ~actions ~were improper, unethical, and potentially, unlawful. Rowe's actions were also high~y:prejudi&ial.i,'DIA could deem the discovery of inaccurate and false employment inforrnati6n ;on :J:PAS, a security breach. The effected personnel could lose their security clearanegs',a~dtheirjo.bs. This in turn could severely impair the Ravens Group's ability to perform~ ttae ~onti-adt, ~hich requires the Ravens Group to provide cleared personnel. Rowe's actions; therefore, could potentially cause severe financial damage to the Ravens Group as well as to the RaVens Group's reputation.

JPASIis an automat_ted system for maintaining and adjudicating information for Department of De£ense contractors and,,pe~0nnel. ¯

. ' '. -}',~ ~. 'r~,:'."
: " .,PI~O~ECT~*D MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE ~. . W~ITH GO.V,.ERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

193
www.patrickhenry.net

'¯¯'

~' ¯ ).

, -.~ ¯ ,:¢.;' :p ~-~., i ', ~.~. " :~ :.

04/20/2006 T]]U 14:02

.

[TX/RX NO 9659]

[~003

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 14 of 30

From: P~itr.i" }~tHe'n~ ¢: LLP ~

703 256 7883

04/20/2006 13: 52

' KHENRY
General .Accountability' Office April 20, 2006 Page 3 ' .... :"' Rowe's Questionable and Potentially Unlawful Conduct has Irretrievably 'Compromised this Procurement Action; thus, DIA Should Issue a New ,Solii:itati0n and Conduct a New Source Se,lection : " " i' ' " ' : in)he April6th As discussed Protest letter and confirmed in this supplement, Rowe has engaged iln ~hi~l~13~ 'que~ionable, unethical, and potentially unlawful conduct, to obtain confid~nti~i arikl pr~spri&tary information regarding the Ravens Group, to win award of this procurement: As a result of Rowe's actions, the Ravens Group is validly concerned that its technical .p.erf, o~nka~n_ce st,~ategies, staffing methods, and pricing strategies have been severely comprom!se~!. ::Tllus, any corrective action that merely re-evaluates the proposals the offerors have air.eddy.submitted would be inadequate and extremely unfair to the Ravens Group. Moreoxter,. arty eo.rrective action that continues to deem Rowe as a viable potential awardee is improp.¢r:~, .a~. d, i~r~c.~ta.zis..tetnt with well-established tenets of fair competition. ~¢~ 't"l~r.efore r .~iuest that Rowe be permanently disqualified froin participating in this procurement action. I1. Requestofor Hearing

~f tl~e 'is'~i~~~in-.~.:.is case cannot be resolved on the basis of the documents, the Ravens Group ~.es~e~,.~.~s~:th¢:~ig~to request a hearing on all of the matters set forth above. 4 C.F.R. §

21.~(d) (20C~6), . ..:~.
III.
t;'.~ !. /'~

it.:; ",:,.~ .,~.:~" ".,:i

R.g,q~.e~t f~r R~lief

.

.;

In'viedf0f the foregoing, GAO should recommend that DIA permanently disqualify ¯ "U{' .(q"'.: "'-;;-r . t. Rowe ~'~o~ '~artlclpatmri m this procurement and reaffirm its ong,nal award to the Ravens ~ " "-'P:."; .'ih ,'~ ',']J'.[, 1 Group.~:]~d. tl~e .~..]~l~Hlatl~'e, DIA should permanently d~squallfy Rowe from th~s procurement, develop, and.i~sue a new' solicitation, receive and review new proposals, and make a new source ": ".' L~,'.-lt:,'.'..;'2" ".d; ' selectmnt,~ec~smn. " ' : ' ":2:" ""

".: ,,,:'r'~:Q..:t .~:C.~-

:2":. . . ".,"
.PROTECT~ED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCOI(DANCE

194

WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

~'."..

' "'"

www."atr~c~'~'en"'ne~~' ' "" ,r- ~
04/20/2006 TtlU 14:02 [TX/RX NO g659] ~004

: ,il.~.'~,~.. ¯ ~'~'"'~i'~ ~ ', 2" :

' .t':~, :;@:!': :, :'.'";.

05/02/2006 12:42 FAX 2025129749

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

GAO PL DIV

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 15 of 30
~ 005/006

From :P~ t r~i d4/~hr~, LLP

703 256 7883

04/2D/20~ ]3:52 #222 P.O05

General Ac~ourit~bilib, Office April 20, 2006 Page 4 The Ravens Group also requests the award of protest pursuit costs, including attorney fees, and such other relief as is appropriate.

cc:

Major P'eterTran~ Esq.

195
PRoTECT.ED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

"~' : ~''"::~ ~'

www.patrickhenry.net
04/20/2006 T]R'TJ 14:02 [TX/RX NO 9659] ~005

05./02/2006 12:42 FAX 2025129749

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9DIV Filed 05/12/2007 GAO PL

Page 16 of 30 ~ UU~/UU~

¯

,Frog:Patrick/Henry LLP

703 256 7883

04/20/2006 13:51 #222 P.O01

Patrick Henry LLP
7619 Little River Turnpike Suite 340 Annandale, Virginia 22003 (703) 256-7754 Fax: (703) 256-7883

FAX COVER SHEET
FROM: FAX No. PHONE No. Client/Matter: Date: DOCUMEi~TS Supplemen[al Protest of Protest No. B-296741.4 Daryle A. Jordan 703.256.7883 703.256.7754 The Ravens Group, Inc. April 20, 2006 NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover)*

Five

°PLEASE DELIVER TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION PHONE # NAME ORGANIZATION Ms. Mary,O. Curcio, Procurement Law Control 202.512.4788 Group Office of tlie: General Counsel, GAO Major Pe~,et H'.'Tran,.' ...~ U.S. Arrr~)LegM Services 703.696.2825 Trim Attdrney, Agency 301.577,8585 Mr. Jeff Robertson The RavensGroup FAX # 202.512.9749

703.696.1537
301.577.9097

The informationLb~, qtaln~d in thLv facsimile message is information protected by attorney-client and/or the attorney/work

product prlv(lege. .It is intended only for the use of t~ i~ividual named above and the privileges are not waived by virtue of
thi.v h~ing bven ~dnt by facsimile. ~'the ~rson actually receiving this facsimile or an~ other reader of the facsimile ix not the ~T~ c~munication is strict& prohibited. ~y~ h~e ~ed th~ carom unleation in error, please [mmediate{v natty us bY t~ieOh6~d dnd retbrn the original messag~ to us at the above address via U.S. Posta~ Semite.

196
04/20/200t3 TIa2I 14:02 [TX/RX NO 96591 l~001

, Frolic:Patrick/Henry LLP

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

708 256 7888

Filed 05/12/2007

04/21/2006 ]6:84 #280 P.002/008

Page 17 of 30

HENRYZ~

7619 Little River Turnpike Suite 340 Annandale, VA 22003 Tel: 703.256.7754 Fax: 703.256.7883

April 2 l, 2006

PdCHARD E. PATR|CK admitted in VA. DC MAYNARD NL HENRY, SR. admitted in VA, DC PA, MI

Via U.S. Mail and Facismile Mr. Guy A. Tortes Contracting Officer Virginia Conlracting Activity Boiling Air Force Base 200 MacDill Boulevard--Building 6000 Washington, D.C. 20340-5100
DIA Corrective Action in Pursuant to GAO Protest Nos. B-296741.3 and B-296741.4 Under Contract No. HHM40206C0026 Dear Mr. Torres: In our April 6, 2006, Protest letter, we notified you of information that had come to out attention of improper, unethical, and potentially unlawful conduct by Rowe Contracting Services, Inc. ("Rowe") in connection with the above-referenced procurement. Our letter, including sworn witness statements, confirmed that Rowe had made $500.00 cash disbursements to Ravens Group employees for information relating to the award of the above-referenced Contract.

admitted in MD, DC NY, OH DARYLfi A. JORDAN admi~zed in VA, DC PA

Of Counsel
admitled in VA, DC. FL

ETHEL MITCHELL adrnilt~.d in MD, DC, TX Virgin Islands, Ghana

El_TON E NOI~,',IAN admitted in DC, NY, CA

In addition, Scott Rowe, Rowe's President, boasted to Ravens Group officials about information he had obtained about the Ravens Group, including intbrmation conceming the Ravens Group's pricing and technical proposal for this procurement, as well as its staffing methodologies. Based on these revelations, we requested that the Government disqualify Rowe from further participation in this procurement for its use of unfair and unethical business practices. On April 14, 2006, we received credible evidence of even more unfair and unethical business practices by Rowe; we learned that Rowe had entered the secure Joint Personnel Adjudication System ("JPAS") and transferred Ravens Group personnel security clearances to Rowe. Rowe's actions are improper, unethical, and potentially unlawful. For these reasons, we a_agg~ request that Rowe be permanently disqualified from participating in this procurement.

MARYLAND OFFICE 5900 Princess Garden Parkway Suite 640 Lanham, MID 20706 Tel: 240.296.34BB Fax: 240.29&3487

www.patrickhenry.net

197

,

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB F[e~:Patrick/Henry LLP

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 18 of 30

708 256 7888

04/2V2006 t6:85 #280 P,008/008

HENRY
Mr. Guy A. Torres April 21~ 2006 Page 2

As discussed in our April 6th Protest letter, the Defense Intelligence Agency is authorized to disqualify Rowe for misconduct related to this procurement action. In Compliance Corp., v. United States, 22 CI. Ct. 193 (1990), aff'd, 960 F.2d (Fed. Cir. 1992), the Court sustained the contracting officer's disqualification of the contractor after it was revealed that the contractor had approached employees of the incumbent contractor, who was competing for a follow on contract, to obtain information regarding how the incumbent performed the work. In this case, there is undisputable evidence that Rowe made cash payments to Ravens Group employees for confidential and proprietary information during the pendency of the Ravens Group's protest. It is also clear that Rowe unlawfully entered a secure database and tampered with the clearances of Ravens Group's personnel. As the Court stated in Compliance Corp., "the contracting officer is entitled to disqualify those who engage in such conduct, not only to protect the integrity of the contracting process, but to deter others from similar conduct.
Thus, to protect the integrity of this procurement, Rowe should be disqualified.

Mr. Joe N. Ballard President The Ravens Group, Inc.

Major Tran Trial Attorney U.S. Army Legal Services Agency

www.patrickhenry.net

198

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 19 of 30

,

From:Patrick/Henry LLP

708 256 7888

04/21/2006 16:84 #280 P.001/008

Patricl~ Henry LLP 7619 Little River Turnpike Suite 340 Annandale, Virginia 22003 (703) 256-7754 Fax: (703) 256-7883

FAX COVER SHEET
FROM: FAX No. PHONE No. Client/Matter: Date: DOCUMENTS,
Letter to Contracting Officer Re: Contract No. HHM40206C0026 Daryle A. Jordan 703.256.7883 703.256.7754 The Ravens Group, Inc. April21,2006

NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover)*
Three (3)

PLEASE DELIVER TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION

,

NAME
Mr. Guy A. Torres, Contracting Officer Major Peter H. Tran, Trial Attorney LTG (R) Joe N. Ballard

ORGANIZATION PHONE # Virginia Contracting 202.231.8077 Activily, Boiling Air Force Base U.S. Army Legal Services 703.696.2825 Agency
The Ravens Group, Inc. 301.577.8585

FAX #
202.231.2831 70o.696.1537 301.577.9097 301.577.9097

Mr. Jeff Robertson
DAJ

The Ravens Group, Inc.

301.577.8585

The information contained in this facsimile message is information protected by attorney-client and/or the attorney/work product privilege. It is intended only for the use of the individual named above and the privileges are not waived by virtue of this having been sent by facsimile. If the person actually receiving this facsimile or any other reader of the facsimile is not the t n c n dtMrlbulton l~@~,~t~¢'/~.munication is strictly prohibited. If you have reded this c~mmunication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via U.S. Postal Service,

199

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 20 of 30

April 26, 2006

Anthony H. Gamboa, Esquire General Counsel Genera! Accountability Office 441 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20548
Re: Protest of The Ravens Group B-296741.4 Dear Mr. Gamboa: Rowe Contracting Services, Inc. ("Rowe"), 5!50 Highway 22, Suite C11, Mandevitle, Louisiana 70471, hereby intervenes in the referenced protest. Rowe was the awardee of the contract that is the subject of the protest. Accordingly, Rowe is an intervenor as defined in 4. C.F,R. § 2t.0(b). I would appreciate it if GAO and the parties would provide me with copies of all materials filed in the protest. My contact information is listed above. My protected telefax number is (202) 822-4.657. Thank you. Ve~ truly yours,

Kenneth B. Weckstein

KBW:cmj
Guy A. Tortes, Contracting Officer Dar~,le A. Jordan, Esq. ScoLt Rowe Marcy Curcio, Esq. Major peter H. Tran

2O0

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 21 of 30

EPSTEIN

FACSIMILE COVER SHEET

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
To: Major Peter H. T~an From: Kenneth B. Weckstein Date: April 26, 2006 Comments:

Fax Nnmbe~: (703) 696-1537 Arty, No, Client No.:
052

Telephone Number:
(703) 696-2825 Pages (including cover):

53807.002

NOTIC~ Ol~ P~1VILEG~ AND CONFID~BNTIALITY THIS TELECOPY iS PRIWILEOI~D AND CONFIDENTIAL IT IS INTENDED SOLELY FOR THE ADDRESSEF.,, ANY UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE, REPRODUCTION, DISTP.IBUTION OR THE TAKING OF ANY" ACTION IN RBLIANCF_.. ON' THE CONTENTS OP THIS INFO]'(MATION IS PROHIBITED. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS TF~LECOPY iN ~I¢.ROR) PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY,

THIS COMMUNICATION DOE.~; NOT CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS OF A COVERED OPINION WITHIN TH.E MEAN]NO OF CIV.CULAII.230 ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES SI~CRETAP.Y OF THE TP.EASUI~.Y, ACCOILDINOLY, ANY TAX ADVICE CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION CANNOT BE USED, AND WAS NOT INTh-'ND~D OP. %VP.ITTBN TO BE USED, FO~ THE PURPOSE OF AVOIDING UNITED STATES TAX PEq~ALTlhS, IN ADDF['[ON, ANY' TAX ADVICE CONTAINI~D IN THIS COMMUNICATION MAY NOT BE USED TO PP.OMOT~ MARKET OR RECOM MEND A TRANSACTION TO ANOTHER PERSON,
IF YOU DO NOT RE~EIVE ALL PAGES OR HAVE ANYPROBLEM~q IN RECEIVING THIS TELE'COPY, PLEASE ~ALL THE SENDER IMMEDI"A TEL Z

DC:605116~|

201

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB FEB-03-200& 19:22

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 22 of 30 P.O03

VIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY
200 MACDILL BLVD., BLDG 6000 BOLLING AIR FORCE e, ASE
WASHINGTON, D,C. 20340-5100

May 4, 2006

U-0644/AE-2A
Mr. Joseph Ballard The Ravens Group, LLC 1101 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 6o' Floor Washington, DC 2004

RE: Notice of Protest filed the Ravens Group, Inc. Under Request for Proposal No. HHM402-05-R-0017, Defense Intelligence Agency. Dear Mr. Ballard: This letter is to inform you that a GAO protest has been filed by the Ravens Group (B296741.3 ) under RFP HHM402-05-R-0017 for tl~e procurement of janitorial and custodial services for the Defense Intelligence Analysis Center (DIAC) and its new expansion building. The Government has rcviewed the allegations contained in the protest l~led by thc Ravens Group and has decided to take the following corrective action, The Agency intends to conduct a new source se.leerion and a new source selection decision will be issued, There will be no new evaluation. The new source selection will be based on the eun'ent evalttation of nil offerors' final proposal revisio~x You will be notified of future developments. Sinccrely,

Guy A. Tortes Contracting Officer

202
TOTAL P.003

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB FE~-03-200~

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 23 of 30 P.O01

VIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY P.O. BOX 46563 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-6563

To:

From: GUY A TOE_RF.S

(202) 231-8077. Office
Fax: !~honc~ RE: The Raven's Group ~sponse to ¢oem¢~iv~ action letmr dd 4 May 06 Urgent ~ Please Comment Please Reply Peter, Attached is the notice of cotzective action letter we w~rked on that ~ sent to TKG, also thciz response. Cheong Chon (202) 231-8416 it the new CO for th~ effo~ JuanitaJones (202) 9_31-3613 will ~mmin the contmc~ spe~al~st. Please Recycle 703~696-1537 Pages: 3 Including Cover Sheet Date: 8 May 2006

GUY A. TORR~

203

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 24 of 30

GROUP

ens
May 5, 2006

y~a U.S. Mail and Faclsmile M.r, Guy A. Tortes Contracting Officer Virginia Contracting Activity Boiling Air Force Base 200 Mac.DiI1 Boulevard--Building 6000 Washington, D.C. 20340-5100 Corrective Action l~ursuant to GAO Protest No. 1~.291i741.3 D~r Mr. Tones: This responds to you~ lotto, dated May 4, 2006, and requests clarification of the corrective a~on you agreed to take in response to o~r above-referenced protest, Your letter states that there will be a "new sou.r~e selection and new source selection decision" but that there ~ be. artery evaluation. FIow can there be a new smarec selection decision without a new evaluation? In addition, your lvtter stat~s that the "~ew so~rce selection will be based on the current evaluation ofa/I of Serors' final proposals." We iaterpzet this provision to mean that The Ravens Group would b¢ a~lowed to revise our proposal for this rr~luiremcnt. In our April 6; 2006, Protest letter, our April 20t~ supplemextt to that l:rtotest, and our April 21st l~'tea" ~:o yo~, we notified you of compelling and credibl~ evidence we had obta~nea~ including sworn statements, that Rowe Contracting S~rvices, Inc, ("Rowe") had paid for and obtained ont~dcntial and proprietary information regazding our proposal, Thus, it is e, sscatial that you allow us, at a minimum, to revise our proposal. To deny ~s an oppormuity to revise our proposal would place this company at a severe competitive disadvantage in ~he "3a~.' source selection" pl:ocess, and render the "corrective action" you promised to take meaningless. It is tmdisputable that the integri~-y of our proposal has been ~,omprornise.d by I~we's improper, unethical, and rotanlJally tmlaw£ul business l:rractices. Your refusal t~ hoBor our valid request m revise our proposal, would leave us ao daoice bat t~ file another protest t~ protect our rights, Relatedly, we have not heard from you regarding our request for you to disqualify Rowe from ~rther participation in this procurement action bas~xl on its unethical za-ad unfair business practices. We raised-serious concet~ regarding Rowe's bustuess practices as well as its potential breach of security. We a~e SUrl~ised and concea-ned that tiae Defense Intelligence Agency has no~: acted on our request or contactcxi us to investigate these serious charges. We request your response to our requ~t for clarification by close of business Wednesday, May 10, 2006, so we will have adequate time to deteaTnin¢ whether we will have to file another protest.

Side,ely,

President The Ravens Crtoup, Inc. 204

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 25 of 30

P/VFI~ICK :HENRY~

7619 Little River Turnpike Suite 340 ,~,nnandale, VA 22003 Tel: 703.256.7754 Fax: 703.256.7883

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 12, 2006

~dmilted in VA. DC ,MtAYNA.I~D M. I-h:.N~Y, -~R. admitted in VAo DC, PA, MI ~11.ARON |. THEC'.I)O'kE-LE\VI5 ~dmitled in .MD, DC. NY, OH DAR'~°LE A. JORD~kN adrni~ted in VA, DC, PA

VIA U.S. MAIL & FACSIMILE Office of the General Cotmsel U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, Washington, D.C. 20548
Attention:
Re:

Procurement Law Control Group Protest of the Ravens Group, Inc. Under Request for Proposal No. HHM402-05-R-0017 Defense Intelligence Agency

Of Counsel
Y u voP~. 2qONG admil~ed in VA. DG FL ]~ T].t El. ~tJTCHELL admitted in MD. DCo TX US Virgin Island~, Ghana /VlALIK N, D~AKE adalil(ed in VA. DC USPTO Registration. El.TON 1-~ admitled in DC. N~: GA

Dear Sir:

The Ravens Group, Inc. ("Ravens Group"), 9901 Business Parkway, First Floor, Suite H, Lanham, Maryland 20706, by its undersigned counsel, hereby protests the Defense Intelligence Agency's ("DIA" or "Agency") proposed revocation of its award to the Ravens Group of a contract pursuant to Request for Proposal No. HHM402-05-R=0017 and award of this requirement to Rowe Contracting Services, Inc. ("Rowe"). The Ravens Group's telephone number is 301.577.8585 and its facsimile number is 301.577.9097. The ' Contracting Officer for this procurement is Guy A. Tortes, Virginia Contracting Activity, 200 MacDill Boulevard, Building 6000, Boiling Air Force Base, Washington, D.C. 20340-5100. The Contracting Officer's telephone number is 202.231.8077 and his facsimile number is 202.231.2831. A copy of this protest is being sent via facsimile to the Contracting Officer. The Ravens Group first learned of the information upon which this Protest is based, including the prejudice to The Ravens Group, on May 4, 2006. Because this protest is being filed within ten (10) days of The Ravens Group's notice of the bases of the Protest, the Protest is timely filed. 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(2) (2006).

MAI&I.AND OFFICE 5900 Pdncess Garden Parkway Suite 640 L~,nharn, MD 20706 fel: 240,296,3488 Fax: 240.296.3487

Protected Information To Be Disclosed 0nly In Accordance With United States Court of Federal Claims Protective Order

www, patrickhenry.net

905

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB Prom;Eatrick/Henry LLY

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007 Page#286 P.O03/O]O Ubtl2/2UU6 lb:U/ 26 of 30

General Accountability Office May 12, 2006 Page 2 I. SUMMARY

This is the third protest filed on behalf of The Ravens Group in connection with this procurement action. Protest No. B-296741.3 ("TRG Protest 1") was filed March 27, 2006. The General Accountability Office ("GAO') dismissed this Protest via a decision entered April 6, 2006, based on DIA's agreement to take corrective action and "reconsider the award decision." We subsequently filed Protest No. B-296741.4 on April 6, 2006, and supplemented it April 20, 2006 ("TRG Protest 2"). We filed this protest after The Ravens Group discovered that Rowe had used unfair, unethical, and potentially unlawful business practices to obtain confidential and proprietary information about The Ravens Group, which Rowe used against The Ravens Group to win award of this requirement. Rowe's unfair and unethical business practices included making cash payments to Ravens Group's employees to obtain confidential and proprietary information about The Ravens Group. Using unfair and unethical business practices, Rowe obtained information regarding The Ravens Group's staffing and pricing strategies and methodologies related to this specific procurement, as well as privacy protected information regarding The Ravens Group's employees assigned to this specific procurement. In TRG Protest 2, we notified GAO and DIA of compelling evidence of Rowe's misconduct; and clear evidence that the integrity of this procurement had been compromised by Rowe's actions. Based on this development, we requested GAO and DIA to conduct an entirely new source selection, including the opportunity for The Ravens Group (and the other offerors) to revise its proposal, and to disqualify Rowe firom participation in the procurement action based on its misconduct. GAO dismiss6d TRG Protest 2 in a decision entered April 17, 2006, on the same ground that it dismissed TRG Protest l--that DIA had "decided to reconsider the award decision." By a letter received via facsimile May 4, 2006, DIA stated "There will be no new evaluation [and] The new source selection will be based .on the current evaluation of all offerors' ¯ final proposal revision." See Copy of DIA May 4th Letter, enclosed. Thus, it does not appear that DIAwill allow The Ravens Group to revise its proposal even though that proposal has ,clearly been compromised by Rowe. Via a letter to DIA, dated May 5, 2006, and forward to DIA on the same day, The Ravens Group reiterated its concern regarding Rowe's improper and unethical acquisition of information concerning The Ravens Group's proposal, and Rowe's adverse impact on the integrity of the procurement action. The Ravens Group's May 5th letter further requested clarification of DIA's May 4th letter. See Copy of The Ravens Group May 5th Letter, enclosed. To date, however, DIA has not responded to our request for clarification. Thus, we have no choice but to conclude that DIA will not allow The Ravens Group to revise its proposal. DIA's refusal to allow The Ravens Group to revise its proposal will place The Ravens

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

www.patrickhenry.net

206

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 27 of 30

-X..I R I C_.K HEN RY
General Accountability Office May12,2006 Page 3 Group at a substantial competitive disadvantage vis-fi-vis Rowe and other offerors who possess confidential and proprietary information regarding The Ravens Group. For these reasons, we again request that GAO issue a decision recommending that DIA disqualil~ Rowe for misconduct, and conduct an entirely new source selection, including allowing The Ravens Group to revise its proposal. I!. BACKGROUND A. Contract Award to The Ravens Group

DIA issued R_FP No. HHM402-05-R-0017 for janitorial/custodial services at its facility located on Bolling Air Force Base on April 14, 2005 (the "Contract"). In accordance with the evaluation criteria of the RFP, award of the contract was to be made to "the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the "best value to the Government." See RFP, p. 40. DIA awarded the Contract to The Ravens Group on June 28, 2005, and The Ravens Group began performance of the Contract on or about July 1, 2005. Protest of Original Award to The Ravens Group In an undated notification, received by The Ravens Group August 30, 2005, DIA notified The Ravens Group for the first time that the award of the Contract to' The Ravens Group had been protested by letter, dated June 29, 2005, one day after award to The Ravens Group. The protest was ultimately dismissed based on DIA's agreement to take corrective action. On March 23, 2006, nine (9) months following the original contract award, DIA notified The Ravens Group that it had completed the corrective action, and had decided to revoke award to The Ravens Group and re-award the procurement to Rowe.

C.

The Ravens Group's Protests

As noted above, The Ravens Group filed TRG Protest 1 on March 27, 2006, which was dismissed by GAO on April 6, 2006, based on DIA's agreement to take corrective action. Between March 27, 2006, and April 3, 2006, the following occurred: 1) DIA allowed Scott Rowe, President of Rowe and his representatives on to the secured facility and allowed them to begin to interviewing The Ravens Group's employees; 2) Mr. Rowe admitted to Ravens Group officials that he had made cash payments to Ravens Group employees to obtain PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER www.patrickhenry.net

207

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 28 of 30

PATIO,. I (-_.K HENRY
General Accountability Office May 12, 2006 Page 4 information about The Ravens Group, which he then used to win award of the Contract from The Ravens Group. This information was corroborated by several Ravens Group employees in sworn statements. Based on our concerns regarding Rowe's actions, we filed TRG Protest 2 on April 6, 2006. We supplemented this Protest on April 20, 2006, when we learned that Rowe had improperly accessed confidential and private information regarding The Ravens Group and its employees, and tampered with the security clearances of The Ravens Group and its employees. In this protest, we again asked GAO and DIA to disqualify Rowe for misconduct and award the Contract to The Ravens Group, or, in the alternative, allow The Ravens Group to revise its proposal in connection with DIA's corrective action. II1. BASIS OF PROTEST
Ao

The Corrective Action Contemplated by DIA--A New Source Selection and Source Selection Decision Based Solely on The Ravens Group's Current 'Proposal--Would be Inherently Unfair, Prejudicial, and Anti-Competitive

As we interpret DIA's May 4th letter, DIA will not allow The Ravens Group to revise its technical or price proposal, and will base the new source selection decision solely on the offerors" current proposals, Evaluation of The Ravens Group proposal on this basis, would be unfair, prejudicial, and anti-competitive..

As discussed, and documented in TRG Protest 1 and TRG Protest 2, Rowe used unfair, unethical, and potentially unlawful practices to obtain confidential and proprietary information about The Ravens Group, which it used to seize the Contract from The Ravens Group. Rowe's misconduct occurred during the pendency of DIA's proposal review and purported award to Rowe, and subsequently, during the pendency of The Ravens Group's protest. We know that Rowe made cash payments to Ravens Group employees to obtain information about The Ravens Group. Rowe has admitted to obtaining information regarding The Ravens Group's staffing and pricing strategies and methodologies. In addition, we know that Rowe improperly obtained access to confidential and private information concerning The Ravens Group's employees and used this information to improperly tamper with the security clearances of The Ravens Group and its employees. A new source selection and source selection decision, that does not take Rowe's unfair business practices into consideration, and that does not allow The Ravens Group to revise its proposal, would be invalid. Such a process and decision would also be manifestly unfair and prejudicial to The Ravens Group, whose proposal has clearly been compromised by Rowe.
PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER

www.patrickhenn/.net

208

Case 1:07-cv-00243-LMB

Document 15-9

Filed 05/12/2007

Page 29 of 30

,A. [ R I C,K. HEN RY
General Accountability Office May 12~ 2006 Page 5 Based on its Misconduct, Rowe Should be Disqualified from further Participation in this Procurement Action Based on Rowe's misconduct, it would be proper and appropriate for DIA to disqualify Rowe from further participation in this procurement action. See Compliance Corp., v. United State_s, 22 C1. Ct. 193 (1990), aff'd, 960 F.2d (Fed. Cir. 1992) (court approval of disqualification. of contractor that unfairly attempted to obtain information from incumbent contractor). As discussed in our prior protests, in this case, the evidence is conclusive that Rowe approached and paid several Ravens Group employees $500.00 cash to spy for Rowe. Further, Scott Rowe, Rowe's President, boasted to Ravens Group officials regarding his acquisition of information regarding The Ravens Group. There is no doubt that Rowe used unfair and unethical business tactics to obtain information about The Ravens Group. It is also unquestionable that Rowe obtained confidential, proprietary, and private information about The Ravens Group and its employees that Rowe used to its competitive advantage. Rowe, therefore, should be disqualified fi'om participation in this procurement due to its misconduct. III. CONCLUSION

The Ravens Group requests a ruling on its protest by GAO that DIA's decision to revoke award of the Contract to The Ravens Group and re-award the Contract to Rowe, is in violation of the RFP, and Federal law. The Ravens Group therefore respectfully requests that the GAO recommend the disqualification of Rowe and that:

DIA reverse its decision to revoke the Contract Award to the Ravens Group and reinstate the Ravens Group; and Pay the Ravens Group its attorneys fees and other costs incurred in pursuing this protest.
In the alternative, the Ravens Group requests that GAO recommend that:

DIA issue a new solicitation and begin this procurement action again, including the receipt and review of new proposals;

or

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER www.patrickhenry.net

209

I-ro~;l~atrlct
Document 15-9 /~1 Filed 05/12/2007 Page 30 of 30 lUg1 Zbb Ub/IZ/ZUUb Ib:UM ~TZ~I:i P.UU//UIU

RI CK HENRY
General Accountability Office May 12, 2006 Page 6 DIA pay the Ravens Group its bid costs for preparing and submitting its proposal pursuant to the above-referenced RFP, including its submissions following the August 2005 Contract amendment; and Pay the Ravens Group its legal fees and other costs incurred in pursuing this protest.

IV. DISCOVERY REQUEST The Ravens Group requests that DIA produce the following documents:~ All documents evidencing or reflecting the original protest of the award to The Ravens Group, including the original protest letter, the contracting officer's statement, the legal opinion, the agency report, and any other communication regarding the original protest.
All documents evidencing or reflecting the technical evaluation of The Ravens Group and the other offerors.

All documents evidencing or reflecting the basis for DIA's original decision to award the Contract to The Ravens Group and its subsequent decision to award to Rowe. All documents upon which The DIA relied in evaluating the Ravens Group and the other offerors.
All documents evidencing or reflecting DIA's evaluation of the capabilities of The Ravens Group and the other offerors.

All documents evidencing or reflecting DIA's consideration of The Ravens Group's past performance and experience in making its award decision.
o

All documents evidencing or reflecting DIA's consideration of The Ravens Group's price proposal in making its award decision. Any and all information and communications between the Agency and Rowe related to the award of the Contract to Rowe, and Rowe's commencement of performance.

~ This request includes all information relating to DIA's original evaluation which led to the award to the Ravens Group as well as any subsequent evaluation relating to the determination to revoke the Ravens Group's award and award to Rowe.

PROTECTED MATERIAL: TO BE DISCLOSED ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PROTECTIVE ORDER
www.patrickhenry.net

210