Link: GAO Opinion
Agency: Department of the Army
Disposition: Protest denied.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
GAO Digest:
In a negotiated procurement that provided for multiple awards, protest challenging agency’s failure to award protester a contract is denied, where the agency reasonably downgraded protester’s proposal for significant weaknesses in the protester’s proposed safety plan.
General Counsel P.C. Highlight:
Diversified protests the agency’s evaluation of its proposal under the safety and health program subfactor, complaining that its proposal did not state that its “site” safety officer’s could delegate their duties to others. GAO states that in reviewing protests of alleged improper evaluations and source selection decisions, it is not GAO’s role to reevaluate submissions; rather, GAO will examine the record to determine whether the agency’s judgment was reasonable and in accord with the stated evaluation criteria and applicable procurement laws and regulations. A protester’s mere disagreement with the agency’s judgment is not sufficient to establish that an agency acted unreasonably.
The Army’s evaluation of Diversified’s proposal was reasonable. First, with respect to Diversified’s objection to the agency’s assessment of a significant weakness for Diversified’s proposed use of superintendents as safety inspectors, although Diversified initially challenged this assessment, the protester abandoned this ground of protest in its comments. With respect to the Army’s other assigned significant weakness (that is, that Diversified proposed that its safety officers could delegate their responsibilities to others), GAO also finds the agency’s evaluation to be reasonable. As found by the Army, Diversified stated in its proposal that its company safety officer could assign duties to other unidentified individuals. Although Diversified now argues that there is a distinction between a “company” safety officer and a “site” safety officer, its proposal does not explain this distinction. It is an offeror’s obligation to submit an adequately written proposal for the agency to evaluate. The protest is denied.