[Protest of Navy Contract Award for Maintenance Services]
B-220215: Jan 15, 1986
- Full Report:
A firm protested a Navy contract award to another firm for telecommunications equipment and services, contending that: (1) the awardee's system did not meet the solicitation requirements in various respects; (2) the Navy effectively relaxed one solicitation requirement for the awardee; (3) the awardee qualified its offer; (4) the Navy improperly evaluated its cost proposal, which resulted in its displacement as the low bidder; (5) the awardee's proposal was materially unbalanced; and (6) the Navy favored the awardee by eliminating a requirement for a system demonstration. GAO held that: (1) the Navy properly determined that the awardee's proposal met the solicitation requirements in the areas of directory assistance and system restoration; (2) the Navy properly determined that the awardee did not qualify its proposal; (3) the Navy did not relax a system restoration requirement for the awardee; (4) the Navy properly evaluated the protester's cost proposal and did not add duplicative costs; (5) the portion of the protest alleging that the awardee's bid was unbalanced was untimely filed because GAO did not receive it within 10 days of the time the protester became aware of the basis for protest; and (6) the portion of the protest alleging that the Navy improperly eliminated the demonstration requirement was untimely filed because GAO did not receive it before bid opening. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.