Protest spotlight

(This regular feature highlights protests decided by the Government Accountability Office.)

Agency: Army

Protester: Engility

What GAO found: Engility protested its elimination from competition for an Army effort to buy software and engineering support, arguing the service "unreasonably found it nonresponsible."

Engility submitted a proposal in March, according to GAO. The Army in May concluded Engility was not responsible after conferring with a security specialist at Army Communications-Electronic Command about whether it held the required top secret facility clearance.

The Army eventually concluded that a code Engility listed in its proposal corresponded with the company TASC (which Engility bought in 2015) and argued that because of the solicitation's requirement, Engility could not be considered eligible for award, according to the GAO report.

But GAO, in its protest decision, said the Army was aware of both the transaction between TASC and Engility as well as inconsistencies between key databases.

"Despite the agency’s knowledge and these evident inconsistencies, the agency made no effort to obtain accurate, up-to-date information from either the protester, or directly from the [Defense Security Service] office identified in the protester’s proposal, regarding either the status of that transaction or its possible effect on the top secret facility clearance for its proposed place of performance in Chantilly, Virginia," the report said.

GAO recommended the Army reconsider its nonresponsibility determination.

Read the decision here.