United States Government Publishing Office publisher pbl distributor dst United States Government Accountability Office author aut Government Organization text government publication eng GAOREPORTS Legislative Agency Publications gao_comptroller_general legislative 2016-06-24 U.S. Government Publishing Office 2002-11-26 monographic deposited born digital 13 p. GA 1.13:B-291152 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-B-291152 P0b002ee18fd4c07d f:291152 DGPO 2016-06-24 2016-06-24 GAOREPORTS-B-291152 machine generated eng fdlp COMPTROLLERDECISION GAOREPORTS-B-291152 B-291152 Comptroller General Decision 1. Evaluation of protester's past performance as presenting a moderate performance risk is unobjectionable where the agency reasonably based the assessment on consideration of significantly negative performance evaluations under contracts that protester specified as relevant in its proposal; protester's explanations and attempts during discussions to minimize or disavow the relevance of the unfavorably rated performance and to disassociate itself from the adverse performance information were considered by the agency, which reasonably concluded that the explanations did not provide any basis to ignore the poor performance under relevant contracts listed and performed by the protester. 2. Uniformly favorable assessments of awardee's past performance under numerous contracts that explicitly satisfied the relevancy criteria under the solicitation provided a reasonable basis for the agency to evaluate the awardee's past performance as presenting a low performance risk. 3. Protester's contention that various alleged technical enhancements under its proposal were not considered and credited by agency is contradicted by the evaluation record, which reflects that the agency recognized the items at issue and gave protester evaluation credit in several instances where it was warranted, but reasonably declined to credit the protester for other features that constituted nothing beyond satisfying the solicitation requirements, or consisted of unsupported assertions that were not substantiated by the technical proposal. 4. Where the record reflects that agency's evaluation of technical proposals is reasonable and consistent with the solicitation evaluation criteria, protester's repeated disagreements concerning the relative merits of different areas of the respective proposals does not provide a valid basis to question the propriety of the evaluation. 5. Agency's cost realism analysis was reasonably based in part on favorable Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) reports that were provided orally to agency during course of evaluation, as evidenced by e-mail, even though a final DCAA report confirming the previously conveyed interim evaluations was not transmitted until after the award determination had been made. 6. Agency's cost/technical tradeoff and resulting award determination which is reasonable, documented and consistent with the solicitation criteria is unobjectionable. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-B-291152/html/GAOREPORTS-B-291152.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-B-291152/pdf/GAOREPORTS-B-291152.pdf GAO/B-291152 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-B-291152 Comptroller General Decision GAO/B-291152; ViaSat, Inc., B-291152; B-291152.2, November 26, 2002;