Protester Said It Should’ve Received a HIgher Past Performance Rating. Why Did GAO Dismiss the Argument?
The protester wanted a higher past performance rating. GAO found this argument failed to state a valid protest. The protester had already received the highest possible rating.
Arcticom LLC, GAO B-421756, B-421756.2
- Past Performance Rating – The protester objected to the past performance evaluation. The protester received a satisfactory confidence rating. The protester claimed it should’ve received a substantial confidence rating. GAO found this argument failed to state a valid basis of protest. The satisfactory rating was the highest rating available under the solicitation.
- Prejudice – The protester also objected to the evaluation of the awardee’s proposal. But another intervening offeror was in line for award before the protester. The protester had not challenged the evaluation of this intervening offeror and thus had not demonstrated a substantial chance of receiving award.
The protester is represented by Kenneth A. Martin of The Martin Law Firm, PLLC. The awardee is represented by Adam Lasky, Erica L. Bakies, and Bret C, Marfut of Seyfarth Shaw LLP. The agency is represented by Andrew Campos of the Navy. GAO attorneys Jacob M. Talcott and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail participated in the decision.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
[pdf-embedder url=”https://staging.pub-k.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/GAO-Arcticom.pdf” title=”GAO – Arcticom”]
