Evaluation of Fair and Reasonable Pricing Sufficient for Procurement Not Requiring Best Value Tradeoff Decision; GAO B-413559.3, Sevatec, Inc., InfoReliance Corporation, Enterprise Information Services Inc., Buchanan & Edwards Inc.

Pre-award protest challenging the agency’s evaluation scheme is denied, where the FAR does not prohibit agencies from using a “highest technically rated offerors with a fair and reasonable price” evaluation scheme, even though such an approach is not specifically spelled out in regulation, and where the agency’s plan to evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness is sufficient to satisfy the Competition in Contracting Act because no tradeoff is contemplated; and protest challenging the agency’s approach to evaluating organizational risk is denied, where the agency reasonably determined that a prime contractor working with numerous subcontractors did not propose the same level of risk as a joint venture consisting of members who have not previously worked together; and protest that agency is making an insufficient number of awards to ensure adequate competition at the task order level is denied where record shows that the agency intends to award approximately 60 contracts, and has taken other steps to encourage competition at the task order level.