Protest Based on Bidder Responsiveness, Solicitation Specifications, and Procurement Procedures

A protester to a contract award contended that: the awardee was not responsible; the solicitation contained defective specifications, lacked evaluation factors, and did not reflect Government needs; and discussions were held with the awardee after receipt of best and final offers. There was no basis for objection to the determination that the awardee satisfied one of the solicitation's definitive responsibility criteria, and GAO does not generally review affirmative determinations of responsibility. A contention of error in the solicitation was untimely. The solicitation clearly contained an evaluation scheme which was followed by the agency, and there was no basis to conclude that the solicitation did not reflect Government needs. With reference to meetings held after best and final offers: the determination that the technical proposal was within the competitive range was not questioned, and the meeting was not improper since it was held solely for confirmation purposes and no new information resulted.