Allegation of Improper Conduct of Procurement

The protester claimed that the conduct of the procurement, including selection and application of evaluation factors, specification changes, and multiple requests for best and final offers was improper, resulted in auction bidding, and reflected favoritism toward the awardee. Various changes made to specification requirements and evaluation criteria, resulting in additional calls for best and final offers, did not indicate the presence of auction bidding. The series of changes did not result in the unfair practice of helping the awardee bring an unacceptable proposal up to the acceptable level. The agency did not show favoritism by waiving certain requirements since only one requirement was relaxed and that accommodated both offerors. Although cost was listed as the least important of four evaluation factors, it was considered in numerical scoring and source selection. A claim regarding restriction of competition through solicitation of proposals only from development contractors was untimely filed after bid opening.