GAO granted NASA’s request for dismissal, finding that VMD had failed to protest its exclusion from the competitive range within the 10 days required by GAO’s bid protest regulations. Following the protest, NASA filed a request to dismiss VMD’s protest for untimeliness. Additionally, VMD alleged unequal treatment with respect to the past performance factor based on NASA providing identical ratings to VMD and another offeror despite VMD identifying unique and advantageous past performance. Specifically, VMD alleged that NASA held VMD’s proposal to a higher standard under the mission suitability factor by assigning strengths to other proposals despite VMD proposing the same or substantially similar performance. The SSDD informed VMD of the strengths identified under the mission suitability factor in each of the proposals that were included in the competitive range.īased on the debriefing, and, in particular, the SSDD, VMD filed a post-award protest at GAO challenging its exclusion from the competitive range based on unequal treatment. and provided VMD with its requested debriefing, which included debriefing slides, the Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD), and the Source Evaluation Board’s findings with regard to VMD’s proposal. Subsequently, NASA made award to MORI Associates, Inc. In response to this notification, VMD did not request a preaward debriefing, but informed NASA that it was electing to receive a postaward debriefing “in order to learn as much as possible from the debriefing process so that it might better improve its performance in future procurements.” Accordingly, NASA notified VMD that its proposal had not been included in the competitive range, and that requests for debriefings would be provided in accordance with FAR 15.505 for preaward debriefings and FAR 15.506 for postaward debriefings. NASA’s initial evaluation of VMD’s proposal revealed a number of significant weaknesses under the mission suitability factor. VMD’s proposal was one of several submitted in response to NASA’s solicitation. Award was to be made on a best value basis according to three evaluation factors: (1) mission suitability (2) past performance and (3) cost/price. In VMD Systems Integrators, Inc., the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contemplated the award of an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract, set aside for small businesses, for information technology, information management, communications, and multimedia services. 14, 2016), GAO answered that question with its characteristic strict interpretation of timeliness requirements. But what happens when the only opportunity to protest occurs at a time when the protester is prohibited from receiving the very information it needs to meaningfully challenge the agency’s source selection decision? In VMD Systems Integrators, Inc., B-412729, 2016 WL 1085374 (Comp. Any protest not based on solicitation improprieties must be filed within 10 days after the basis of the protest is known or should have been known, or within 10 days after a requested and required debriefing. GAO’s timeliness rules are notoriously rigid.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |