[Protest of Contract Award Under BIA Solicitation]

A Native American firm protested a Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) contract award under a request for proposals (RFP) for a range stocking rate study of an Indian reservation. The RFP provided for award of a fixed-price contract based 90 percent on technical considerations and 10 percent on price. The protester contended that its proposal was improperly scored because the evaluator had worked for BIA less than 1 year and lacked experience. It is not the function of GAO to appraise the adequacy of the qualifications of agency contracting personnel and the protester provided no basis for questioning the evaluator's qualifications. The protester also questioned the propriety of giving the awardee perfect scores, since it lacked certain experience. GAO found no basis to question the evaluator's determination, because BIA was allowed some discretion in the consideration of past experience. The protester also suggested that, evaluation scores notwithstanding, its technically acceptable proposal should have been selected for award based on its low price. Since the protester neither alleged nor showed that BIA acted unreasonably in determining that the awardee's higher evaluation score was sufficient to offset the protester's lower price, GAO could not find the award unreasonable. In addition, GAO found that the protester's unsubstantiated allegations of personal and politically motivated reasons for rejecting its proposal were not sufficient to show improper action on the part of BIA procurement officials. Finally, GAO dismissed as untimely an allegation by the protester that this procurement should have been set aside for Indian firms under the Buy Indian Act. Since the absence of a set-aside designation was apparent on the face of the solicitation, it should have been challenged in a protest filed prior to the closing date for receipt of proposals. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.