[Protest of Air Force Contract Award for Vehicle Maintenance and Operation Services]

A firm protested an Air Force contract award for vehicle maintenance and operation services, contending that the Air Force: (1) improperly determined that its proposed staff was insufficient; (2) failed to conduct meaningful discussions; (3) was obligated to consider its president's past experience when evaluating corporate experience; (4) improperly failed to consider its low price; and (5) was biased in favor of the awardee. GAO held that the: (1) Air Force reasonably determined that it required more staff than the protester proposed; (2) Air Force was not obligated to conduct discussions with the protester, since it determined that the protester was not in the competitive range; (3) Air Force was not obligated to consider the prior related experience of a principle corporate officer; (4) Air Force reasonably excluded the protester's low bid from the competitive range, since the solicitation provided that technical merit was the critical evaluation factor; and (5) protester untimely filed its protest of bias after bid opening. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.