[Protest of DLA Contract Award for Audio-Visual Slide Show]

A firm protested a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) contract award, contending that: (1) price should have been a more significant evaluation factor; (2) it should have been awarded the contract on the basis of its initial offer; (3) DLA failed to point out technical deficiencies in its proposal; and (4) there were undue delays in the procurement. GAO noted that: (1) the evaluation scheme emphasized technical factors over price; (2) the contracting officer advised offerers that funding for the procurement would be limited and afforded them the opportunity to submit revised technical and/or cost proposals; (3) protests based on alleged improprieties incorporated into a solicitation by an amendment must be filed prior to the next closing date for receipt of proposals; and (4) discussions have taken place if an offerer is given the opportunity to revise its initial proposal. GAO found that: (1) the allegation that price should have been a more significant evaluation factor was untimely filed; (2) the protest that award should have been made on the basis of initial proposals was not filed within 10 working days after the protester learned of the request for revised proposals; (3) an agency's decision not to engage in technical discussions is not objectionable where a proposal contains no technical deficiencies; (4) an awardee's decision to lower its price without changing its technical proposal is a matter of its own business judgment; and (5) procedural deficiencies in a procurement have no effect on the validity of the procurement. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.