Protest Concerning a Negotiated Procurement

A firm protested a solicitation by the General Services Administration (GSA). The protest concerned a negotiated procurement involving the award of Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts for several types of pre-linked rubber stamps and related items. Upon receipt of the initial proposals, GSA ascertained that several offered "Perma Stamp" products. GSA determined that all of the offered Perma Stamp products were essentially the same because all used the same manufacturer's raw materials. Instead of making multiple awards, GSA decided to make only one award for Perma Stamp products on the basis of the lowest net price. The firm protested this action. GSA argued that the protest was untimely. However, the protest was filed within the 10-day limitation. The protester contended that: (1) although it uses the manufacturer's raw materials, its product was not essentially the same as the stamps offered by other licensees; (2) the responsible GSA officials failed to comply with the FSS Procurement Letters; and (3) GSA erred in selecting the awardee as the offeror to be used as the benchmark pricing criterion for custom stamps because the FSS Procurement Letter stated that the offeror selected should be one which sells to the Government in significant volume, and the awardee did not. The firm's protest appeared to be premised on the idea that, once GSA issued a solicitation allowing multiple awards, it was grossly unfair for the agency to change its approach and decide that only a single award would be made for essentially similar products because this created chaos and uncertainty for the offerors. GAO held that there is nothing unusual about a contracting agency amending a request for proposals after initial proposals have been received. GSA did not formally amend the solicitation, but it did, in requesting best and final offers, notify all offerors by letter that only a single award would be made for Perma Stamp products. Such notification was sufficient to place offerors on notice of the change in the award criteria. GAO did not read the FSS Procurement Letter as limiting the ability of GSA to amend the solicitation or as forcing GSA to choose between canceling the solicitation or proceeding with multiple awards. GAO did not believe that the record failed to offer rational support for the inclusion by GSA of the protester's product along with the Perma Stamp products offered by other offerors. Accordingly, the protest was denied.