DynCorp International says it was treated worse than other competitors for the Army's LOGCAP V competition, according to a redacted complaint filed in federal court.
Though the document was filed with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims early this month, a redacted version was only made available late last week.
In the complaint, DynCorp alleges the service "conducted unequal and misleading discussions," "failed to conduct a proper cost realism determination" and made a best-value determination that was "arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law."
"Most significant is the Army's failure to engage in meaningful discussions with [DynCorp International] regarding DI's cost/price proposal and its Labor Staffing Model," the company alleges in its complaint.
DynCorp contends the service helped other competitors amplify and correct their proposals, but did not assist DynCorp. "As a result, DI was not provided a meaningful opportunity to modify its proposal to address the weaknesses or deficiencies subsequently identified by the Army that had competitive impact on DI's chance of contract award," the complaints adds.
DynCorp criticizes the Army's cost realism analysis, calling it an "abuse of discretion" and "not in accordance with governing law" for the service "not to conduct a proper cost realism analysis in connection with the unrealistically low offers submitted by the awardees."
The company asks the court to put in a place a "permanent injunction against the Army to prevent it from proceeding under the IDIQ contracts awarded to Fluor, KBR, [a Parsons-PAE team] and Vectrus."