[Protest Against Navy Contract Award for Engineering Support Services]

B-232143,B-232143.2: Nov 21, 1988

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

Two firms protested a Navy contract award to another firm for engineering support services, contending that the Navy did not properly evaluate the awardee's proposal for cost realism. The first protester also contended that the: (1) awardee did not propose adequate wages for support personnel; and (2) Army had debarred the awardee. The second protester also contended that: (1) a solicitation amendment improperly rearranged the evaluation criteria; and (2) the Navy did not evaluate proposals consistently with the solicitation. GAO held that: (1) the Navy reasonably conducted a cost-realism analysis and relied on another agency for advice; (2) whether the awardee paid adequate wages was a matter within the Department of Labor's jurisdiction; (3) the first protester abandoned its contentions regarding the awardee's alleged debarment; (4) the second protester untimely protested the allegedly improper solicitation amendment; and (5) the Navy reasonably determined that the second protester's higher cost outweighed its technical advantages. Accordingly, the protests were dismissed in part and denied in part.