Protest of Proposed Air Force Contract Award
Highlights
A firm protested the proposed award of a contract to a competing firm for an upgraded military training system by the Air Force. The contentions were based on numerous solicitation practices and procedures the protester felt were objectionable. GAO addressed and answered each complaint. The protester claimed that: (1) the technical evaluation, which found the competing proposals to be essentially equal, was arbitrary and capricious and the cost evaluation was flawed; (2) the procurement did not represent the Government's minimum needs and that it would be funded by an incorrect appropriation in the event of the proposed award; (3) the Air Force improperly held discussions with the awardee firm after the submission of best and final offers; (4) the firm claimed that it was denied the opportunity to propose a cost-effective alternative approach to using Government-furnished equipment; and (5) there were inaccuracies in the Air Force decision which provided a significant discrepancy and called for an investigation into Air Force procurement practices. Upon review, the records indicated that the procuring officials had the relevant information concerning the proposals and evaluated the facts in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria. GAO maintained that the question of contract funding was not relevant to the propriety of source selection and regarded the issue of contract funding as a matter of contract administration and not applicable to this protest. The charge that Air Force officials improperly held discussions was denied, and the protester provided no evidence to support its contention. Thus, the protester failed to carry its burden of proof. GAO held that the Air Force determined that the potential for savings was insufficiently certain to permit reopening discussions and, thus, was not required. GAO conceded, however, that the Air Force was remiss in several instances of evaluation, but these errors did not have a direct effect on the contract award. After reviewing these arguments and conclusions, GAO decided that there was no legal basis to rescind the decision of the Air Force. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.