[Protest of Contract Award Alleging Improper LSA Determination]

A firm protested a Defense Construction Supply Center contract award under a request for proposals for aircraft equipment. The protester contended that the contracting officer improperly determined that it was not eligible for a labor surplus area (LSA) preference and that, upon being advised that its decision concerning the preference was improper, the contracting officer reversed an initial determination that the protester's proposal was technically acceptable. The protester had indicated that 51 percent of the contract would be incurred in whichever of two LSA's was most advantageous to contract delivery requirements. The protester's bid was not evaluated as an LSA concern because it failed to specify the street address at which it intended to perform in one LSA, and the agency determined that the bid was ambiguous because the other work location proposed by the protester was not an LSA. The agency rejected the offer because it was technically unacceptable. GAO found that the protester's proposal was properly rejected as ambiguous, because a bid which indicates that the bidder will perform in an LSA, but designates a non-LSA place of performance, is ambiguous and not eligible for LSA status. In addition, GAO found that the contracting officer was not required to reopen discussions to permit the protester to make its bid acceptable. Since the decision not to evaluate the protester as an LSA was correct, GAO had no need to resolve the issues raised by the agency's determination that the protester's bid was technically unacceptable. Accordingly, the protest was denied.