GAO decision - Bid protest

[u/Juicy-Details00]

https://www.gao.gov/products/b-424575%2Cb-424575.2

The full report is out. Spoiler alert!! This is juicy. Really juicy. The juiciest part imo: a senior NSF employee was identified as the KBR program director. This part of the protest was not sustained by gao. “Employee A had twice inappropriately asked about the status of this procurement.”

[u/sciencemercenary]

TLDR: 6 of 7 protest requests for reevaluation were denied (ruled in favor of KBR). The GAO recommends that the NSF reevaluate the KBR proposal based on the 7th protest item, that the agency unreasonably credited the awardee (KBR) with the experience and past performance. Whether or not the NSF does the reevaluation is TBD.

---

Summary of document:

1. Allegation that the agency unreasonably failed to consider a corporate transaction concerning the awardee is denied where the record shows the agency analyzed the scope and ramifications of the pending transaction.

2. Allegation that the agency’s cost realism evaluation was unreasonable is denied where the record shows the agency examined the awardee’s labor rates and the supporting data to determine they realistically could support recruiting and retaining labor.

3. Allegation that the agency unreasonably evaluated the awardee’s proposed key person is denied where the record shows that the agency did not relax any material solicitation requirements to accommodate the proposed individual’s “cooling off” period.

4. Allegation that the agency unreasonably considered whether the awardee unfairly accessed competitive information through its hiring of a former agency official is denied where the record shows the contracting officer meaningfully investigated and reasonably determined that the individual did not have access to non-public competitively useful information and the scope of his duties and nature of his prior employment did not create the appearance of an impropriety.

5. Allegations that the agency unreasonably evaluated the protester’s management approach are denied where the record shows that the evaluation was consistent with the contents of the proposal and the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

6. Allegations that the agency unequally evaluated management approach proposals are denied where the record shows that any differences between the evaluations were supported by distinctions between the proposals.

7. Allegation that the agency unreasonably credited the awardee with the experience and past performance of its affiliate company is sustained where the record shows that the firm’s proposal did not articulate what resources or services the affiliated company would provide in supporting performance of this contract.

[snip]

RECOMMENDATION We recommend that the agency reevaluate KBR’s proposal under the prior experience and past performance factors consistent with this decision. NSF should then conduct a new tradeoff analysis and make a new selection decision. We also recommend that the agency reimburse Battelle its costs of filing and pursuing its allegations challenging the prior experience and past performance evaluations and the selection decision, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. 4 C.F.R. § 21.8(d)(1). The protester’s certified claim for costs, detailing the time expended and costs incurred, must be submitted to the agency within 60 days after receiving this decision. 4 C.F.R § 21.8(f). *

[u/packetfire]

This does not seem to be nearly enough basis to move the award from KBR to Battelle.

[u/IllustriousRepeat922]

This is certainly big news and I hope it gets worked out to the betterment of the people who are and will be working down there. I was a consultant for the Polar Science Alliance effort, was very proud of our team and thought we offered some cool stuff that NSF would like. Now will wait and see what happens next.