Challenge to Responsibility Determination (Cost Realism)

DECISION Department of Transportation Challenge to Responsibility Determination Protestor: [Company Name] Agency: Department of Transportation Protest Type: Cost Realism DECISION The protester challenges the award of a contract to [Incumbent Company] under [Solicitation Number], issued by the Department of Transportation for [Service Description]. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on [Date]. The solicitation provided for a best-value tradeoff between technical capability, past performance, and price. [Number] proposals were received. The agency evaluated proposals and awarded the contract to [Incumbent Company]. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of proposals. PROTEST GROUNDS The protester argues that: 1. The agency unreasonably evaluated technical proposals. 2. The agency's price realism analysis was inadequate. 3. The agency failed to consider [specific factor]. AGENCY'S POSITION The agency argues that: 1. The technical evaluation was reasonable. 2. The price realism analysis was adequate. 3. All evaluation factors were properly considered. DISCUSSION [Detailed analysis of protest grounds] GAO finds that the agency reasonably evaluated proposals. The protester has not shown that the evaluation was unreasonable. RECOMMENDATION The protest is denied. The protest is denied. ['[Protester Name]' 'By: [Attorney Name]' '[Law Firm Name]' ] ['[Agency Name]' 'By: [Agency Representative]' '] Decided: [Date]