Protest challenging the agency’s decision not to reject a competitor’s proposal is denied, where the agency was not required, in an unrestricted procurement, to reject the proposal of offerors not affiliated with the incumbent contractor.
Akima Support Operations LLC protested the Air Force’s award of a base operations support services contract to Choctaw Defense Services, arguing that the proposal of any offeror not affiliated with the incumbent should have been rejected.
Akima argued that any non-incumbent contractor’s proposal could not reasonably be found to be technically acceptable. As an affiliate of the incumbent, Akima argued that only its proposal could be considered technically acceptable.
More specifically, Akima argued that CDS’s proposal should have been rejected as unacceptable in light of the solicitation’s mobilization requirements. Akima speculated that CDS proposed to purchase certain required equipment from Akima’s incumbent sister corporation and maintained that the incumbent had no intention to sell the equipment to CDS. Accordingly, Akima argued that none of its competitors could provide a reasonable approach to meeting the mobilization requirements.
Akima also asserted that CDS’s proposal relied on hiring incumbent employees, which should have been deemed unrealistic due to its non-incumbent status and lower proposed price. Pointing to its own proposed price, Akima speculated that CDS proposed inadequate staffing or would fail to meet certain wage requirements.
The agency argued that Akima’s protest was factually and legally insufficient, and GAO agreed, finding that Akima’s challenges were based on the terms of the solicitation and its belief that only its proposal could meet the requirements. GAO concluded this argument reflected dissatisfaction with the agency’s decision to conduct a competitive procurement, not any defect in the solicitation or evaluation of proposals, and dismissed the protest.
Akima Support Operations LLC is represented by James C. Fontana, Jeffry R. Cook, and L. James D’Agostino of Dempsey Fontana, PLLC. Choctaw Defense Services is represented by Steven J. Koprince, Matthew T. Schoonover, Matthew P. Moriarty, and Ian P. Patterson of Koprince Law, LLC. The government is represented by Michael J. Farr, and Colonel C. Taylor Smith, Department of the Air Force. GAO attorneys Glenn G. Wolcott and Christina Sklarew participated in the preparation of the decision.