Decision Released: Air Force communications and technical support services protest

File No. B-422421.6,B-422421.7

Digest

1. Protest and supplemental protest challenging the agency’s pending corrective action in response to a prior protest are dismissed as premature because they anticipate improper agency action while the corrective action remains ongoing.
2. Protest challenging the agency’s stated intention to analyze a sample of the proposed labor rates for the price realism evaluation is denied where the protester has not shown that this approach is unreasonable or inconsistent with the solicitation.

Discussion

General Dynamics argues that the proposed corrective action anticipates that the agency will not evaluate price realism and professional compensation in accordance with the solicitation.[2] General Dynamics also raises a supplemental protest ground arguing that it learned from the agency report that the agency treated General Dynamics and Salient disparately in the evaluation under the technical solution factor because the agency assigned two strengths to Salient’s proposal ([DELETED] and [DELETED]), but did not assign strengths to General Dynamics’s proposal even though both offerors proposed similar solutions. General Dynamics asserts that the agency was therefore required to re-evaluate the offerors’ proposals under the technical solution factor as part of its corrective action. As discussed below, we dismiss both protest grounds as premature. In addition, General Dynamics argues that in performing its price realism analysis the agency is not considering enough labor categories. We deny this basis of protest.

Decision

General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc., of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the agency’s pending corrective action following General Dynamics’ prior protest of the award of a contract to Salient CRGT, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA489023R0013, issued by the Department of the Air Force for communications and technical support services. The protester argues that the agency’s proposed corrective action to reevaluate proposals under the price/cost factor anticipates an evaluation that is unreasonable and inconsistent with the solicitation. In addition, General Dynamics contends that the agency should reevaluate proposals under the technical solution factor.

We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part.

Read the decision here.

🔊 Listen to Story