The protester argued the agency failed to hold meaningful discussions because it never indicated negotiations were completed. GAO disagreed. The agency held discussions that informed the protester of a deficiency and permitted the protester to submit a revised proposal. The agency was not required to reopen discussions after it found the revised proposal unacceptable.
Scott Investigations and Research, LLC, GAO B-423342
- Protest – The protester challenged the rejection of its proposal to provide water drinking pouches. It contended the solicitation was unnecessarily restrictive and that the agency failed to provide the protester with meaningful discussions.
- Unnecessarily Restrictive – GAO dismissed this protest ground as untimely. The closing date for the receipt of proposals was November 12, 2024. The unnecessarily restrictive protest ground was first raised on February 21, 2025.
- Meaningful Discussions – The protester argued the agency failed to hold meaningful discussions because the agency never indicated negotiations were completed. It also never allowed the protester to submit a final proposal revision. GAO found the agency held meaningful discussions. The agency opened discussions with the protester and advised the protester it was required to submit a product demonstration model (PDM) and permitted the protester to submit a revised proposal. The agency later found the protester’s revised proposal still unacceptable. The agency was not required to reopen discussions to allow the protester to correct a new deficiency first introduced in the revised proposal.
The protester was represented by Nancy Scott of Scott Investigations and Research, LLC.
The agency was represented by Kari Scheck and Cathleen Choromanski of the Defense Logistics Agency. Mary G. Curcio and John Sorrenti of GAO participated in the preparation of the decision.
— Case summary by Joshua Lim, Assistant Editor.
