[Protest of Navy Contract Award]

A firm protested a Navy contract award under a request for proposals (RFP) for housing construction, contending that: (1) it should have received the award because it offered the lowest price when evaluated in terms of its technical score; (2) the Navy's technical evaluation may have been erroneous; (3) the procurement was conducted in an unusual manner; and (4) the Navy may have enhanced the awardee's proposal design during the course of negotiations. The RFP stated the evaluation method to be used and, since negotiated contracts need not be awarded to the lowest price offerer unless indicated in the solicitation, GAO found that the award was consistent with the solicitation specifications. GAO will not question an agency's technical evaluation absent a showing of unreasonableness or a deviation from established evaluation criteria. GAO reviewed the evaluation and found it unobjectionable. The protester offered no evidence in support of its allegations regarding the conduct of the procurement. GAO held that the protester had the burden of affirmatively proving its case and that its unsubstantiated statements were insufficient to meet this burden. Accordingly, the protest was denied.