Atlantic Scientific & Technology Corporation, B-276334.2,

B-276334.2 Oct 27, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protester's request that General Accounting Office recommend reimbursement of proposal preparation costs and bid protest costs (incurred in pursuing a contract under a solicitation which it alleges was issued with the intent to make award only if award could be made to a particular firm) is denied where the protester has made no showing of bad faith on the part of the government and where the contracting agency's decision not to resolicit the requirements. Was not improper. AS&T filed the instant protest arguing that the procurement was a "sham" from its inception. The RFP was issued on October 21. The annual estimated level of effort was 6. Newlink's proposal was evaluated as representing the best value to the government. View Decision Matter of: Atlantic Scientific & Technology Corporation File: B-276334.2 Date: October 27, 1997 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Atlantic Scientific & Technology Corporation (AS&T) protests the Department of the Navy's decision not to resolicit requirements which had been set forth under request for proposals (RFP) No. N00421-96-R-5177. The Navy canceled this solicitation as part of its corrective action taken in response to an earlier protest filed by AS&T. After being advised that the Navy had reassessed its needs and determined that no additional contractor support services would be needed in the near term, AS&T filed the instant protest arguing that the procurement was a "sham" from its inception. We deny the protest. The RFP was issued on October 21, 1996, for systems engineering and technical assistance services in support of the Navy's P-3 VP Special Projects Program (which includes two P-3 Orion Aircraft Patrol Squadrons). The solicitation set forth three general tasks: imagery research and development, telecommunications connectivity, and operational/maintenance planning. The annual estimated level of effort was 6,000 hours for six labor categories, and the government estimated the total value of the 5- year contract at approximately $2.8 million. Two firms submitted proposals, AS&T and Newlink Corporation. Newlink's proposal was evaluated as representing the best value to the government, and award was made to the firm on February 11, 1997. At its debriefing, AS&T raised three allegations which were repeated in its February 26 protest to this Office: (1) Newlink was ineligible for award as a result of an organizational conflict of interest because one of its employees allegedly assisted in preparing the solicitation's statement of work (SOW); (2) Newlink and the Navy violated procurement integrity rules because the Navy allegedly disclosed AS&T's price to Newlink; and (3) the Navy's source selection decision was flawed because the proposed contract's program manager, Mr. John Rastatter, allegedly pressured the source selection panel to make award to Newlink. The Navy investigated these allegations while preparing the agency report in response to AS&T's protest. One week before the agency report was due, the Navy advised that its investigation had been completed and that the contracting officer had determined that a Newlink employee had assisted in preparing the solicitation's SOW. As to the remaining allegations, the contracting officer found that, although it appeared that government personnel outside of the evaluation process learned of a price difference in the proposals, AS&T's allegation regarding the release of its pricing information to Newlink was uncorroborated. The contracting officer could not substantiate AS&T's allegation that the source selection board was pressured by Mr. Rastatter into recommending award to Newlink, but determined that Mr. Rastatter's impatient attitude and apparent preference for Newlink were improper. The Navy concluded that it would not be prudent to continue with the acquisition and proposed to terminate Newlink's contract for convenience; cancel the solicitation; review the agency's requirements and draft a new SOW; issue a new solicitation; and remove Mr. Rastatter from any role in the reprocurement. In view of the proposed corrective action, our Office dismissed AS&T's protest as academic on March 25. Newlink's contract was terminated for convenience the next day. Since drafting a new SOW and beginning a new competitive procurement are time- consuming processes, and since the requiring activity was pressuring the Navy for completion of work encompassed by at least one of the tasks in the prior solicitation, the Navy attempted to issue two sole-source simplified acquisition procedure actions for the immediate work at issue, one to Newlink and one to AS&T. The sole-source action to Newlink was synopsized in the Commerce Business Daily on April 24 while the documents for the sole-source action to AS&T were being prepared.