[Protests of DOE Contract]

Two firms protested a contract award to any other firm under a Department of Energy (DOE) solicitation, under which DOE was to conduct a two-step negotiated procurement. Both protesters contended that the awardee should not have been allowed to compete under the second step of the procurement because it failed to timely submit its proposal revisions after the first step of the procurement. In addition, the first protester contended that: (1) DOE rejected its bid because the bid acceptance period expired, but could have made award during the offered period; and (2) it was improper for DOE to award the contract to anyone other than the protester, which was the low bidder. GAO held that: (1) the contracting officer did not act arbitrarily in allowing the awardee to compete after submitting the late proposal revisions because, even without the revisions, the proposal could still have been rendered acceptable through discussions; (2) DOE properly rejected the first protester's bid because the bid guarantee was sufficient only during the acceptance period and DOE did not have enough time to award a contract to the protester during that period; and (3) the integrity of the competitive bidding system was more important than making award to the low bidder. Accordingly, the first protest was denied. The second protester also contended that the awardee's bid price was too low. GAO held that this portion of the protest was untimely filed because it was not raised within 10 days of the time the protester knew the basis for the protest. Accordingly, the second protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.