Protest Alleging Unfair Procurement Procedures

The protester objected to the award of a contract, alleging that the successful bidder was given unfair consideration since it was given an opportunity to modify its proposal while the protester was not. Where there was doubt as to whether a proposal was within the competitive range, the proposal was properly included in the competitive range for purposes of negotiations. The fact that the successful offerer was requested to submit additional technical information in support of its proposal did not constitute favorable treatment since the offerer's initial technical proposal contained defects while the protester's did not. There was no need for the agency to conduct technical discussions with the protester who offered to furnish the brand name item referenced in the solicitation. There was a reasonable basis for the agency to conclude that the successful offeror's proposal was technically adequate, and the possibility of patent infringement was properly excluded as a cost factor in evaluating proposals. The award of the contract during the pendency of the protest was proper since the agency determined that prompt award would result in significant monetary savings to the Government.