[Protest of Proposal Rejection Contending Improper Evaluation]

A firm protested the National Cancer Institute's rejection of its proposal to perform testing of antitumor drugs on mice. The protester, an incumbent contractor, offered to perform both conventional and experimental testing. The Institute felt that the experimental testing portion of the protester's proposal was technically unacceptable and eliminated it from the competitive range. The protester contended that, because it had offered to perform both conventional and experimental testing, the Institute improperly failed to evaluate its proposal for conventional testing only. It also argued that the Institute failed to conduct meaningful discussions and improperly excluded it from competition without requesting it to submit a best and final offer. Finally, the protester stated that the Institute failed to give appropriate consideration to its low proposed costs. GAO concluded that the Institute properly construed the protester's proposal as an offer to perform both types of testing and found no merit in the allegation that the Institute wrongfully failed to consider the protester's proposal as encompassing an alternative offer to perform conventional testing only. Furthermore, GAO found that the protester was afforded a reasonable opportunity to correct deficiencies in its proposal during negotiation discussions. An offerer submitting an unacceptable proposal need not be given an opportunity to submit a revised proposal or a best and final offer. The fact that the protester's proposed costs were lowest was not significant, since the solicitation's evaluation criteria emphasized technical merit and estimated costs are not controlling in selecting a contractor for a cost-reimbursement type contract. Accordingly, the protest was denied.