Protest Alleging Improper Evaluation of Proposals and Improper Procurement Procedures

The protester objected to the award of a contract, alleging that the awardee's initial proposal was not within the competitive range, that the awardee's proposal had been improperly evaluated, and that the awardee was improperly allowed to modify its best and final offer. Since the initial proposal was basically acceptable from a technical standpoint, it could not be concluded that the offer of an unavailable computer for which another computer could be acceptably substituted rendered the offer outside the competitive range. The contention that the offerer was allowed to modify its proposal after submission of best and final offers was denied since the telegram extending the date for submission of revised proposals did not specify that the offerers were being given the opportunity to submit best and final offers as required by procurement regulations. The protester's cost modification was appropriately rejected as late since it was received after the deadline for best and final offers. Since the contracting agency indicated that certain information was for official use only, withholding of that information by GAO was proper.