[Protest of DCSC Contract Award for Wiring Harness Units]

A firm protested a Defense Construction Supply Center (DCSC) contract award to another firm for wiring harness units, contending that DCSC improperly rejected its low-priced alternate offer as technically unacceptable. The solicitation permitted offerers to submit alternate products, required offerers of alternate products to furnish data to enable the government to determine the product's acceptability, and stated that, if the government could not determine the product's acceptability by the expected award date, the product would be considered unacceptable. The protester's low-priced alternate product offer included required drawings; however, DCSC found an ambiguity in one of the drawings, determined that the product was technically unacceptable, and awarded the contract to another firm 2 months later. The protester contended that, if DCSC had conducted meaningful negotiations, it would have allowed a minor revision to the drawing to correct the ambiguity. GAO held that the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 requires that, in negotiated procurements, agencies must conduct discussions with all responsible offerers who submit proposals within the competitive range unless it can be clearly demonstrated that acceptance of an initial proposal would result in the lowest overall cost to the government. GAO also held that: (1) DCSC inappropriately failed to conduct discussions with the protester; (2) the ambiguity probably could have been cleared up through discussions; and (3) DCSC had no reasonable basis for not conducting discussions, since it did not make award until 2 months later. Accordingly, the protest was sustained, and GAO recommended that DCSC enter into discussions with all offerers in the competitive range.