Protest Spotlight

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

Agency: Air Force

Awardee: Science Applications International Corp.

Protester: Cubic Applications

What GAO found: Cubic Applications protested the Air Force's award of a task order to SAIC for program security support services, arguing the Air Force misled Cubic by telling the contractor its proposed pricing was "exceptionally low," according to the GAO report.

Cubic contended its interim price was only 2 percent lower than the $58.2 million awarded price for SAIC. Cubic ultimately submitted a final proposal price of $63.2 million.

GAO notes the Air Force was concerned "because the salaries proposed by Cubic were roughly the same as those used by . . . the incumbent on the predecessor contract, which experienced significant lapse and turnover rate issues."

Cubic also contended GAO "engaged in unequal treatment" by not finding SAIC's labor rates exceptionally low as well.

"Absent a reasonable explanation for why SAIC’s apparently exceptionally low rates were not found to be exceptionally low by the agency, we cannot conclude that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable," the GAO report says. "Therefore, on this record, we must agree with Cubic that there was disparate treatment of offerors with respect to the agency’s price evaluation."

GAO recommends the Air Force conduct a new price realism evaluation and, if needed, reopen discussions.

"If the agency reopens discussions, it should request and review revised proposals, evaluate those submissions consistent with the terms of the solicitation, and, in any event, make a new source selection decision," the report adds. "In the event a proposal other than SAIC’s is found to represent the best value to the government, SAIC’s contract should be terminated and the contract awarded to the successful offeror in accordance with the terms of the RFP. We also recommend that the agency reimburse Cubic for its costs of filing and pursuing its protest challenging the award to SAIC, including reasonable attorneys’ fees."

The decision: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/671624.pdf