The company said that there were no other deficiencies in its proposal and that its “price was complete.”
In asking the court for injunctive relief directing the Army to rescind its notice of noncompliance and reinstate GAI to the competition, among other things, GAI argued that if the agency had any doubt about its discount percentage, it should have looked to its proposal for clarification. At no point did the Army do so, it said.
It explained that while the cell may not have had an input value, the Army treated that lack of input as a zero for purposes in formulating the spreadsheet and calculated relevant values.
It said the Army should’ve done a “simple inquiry” to confirm that the relevant discount percentage was, in fact, zero.
GAI also argued that the other offerors with blank cells remain in the competition. Others were retained despite not acknowledging amendments, or submitting more than one proposal, which it said was not allowed by the solicitation’s strict compliance requirements.
