[Protest of Proposed Navy Contract Award for Antennas]
Highlights
A firm protested a Navy contract award to another firm for antennas, contending that the Navy: (1) should have awarded it the contract as the low technically acceptable offerer; (2) improperly evaluated its bid based on information not required of all offerers; (3) was biased against it; and (4) improperly modified the solicitation evaluation criteria. The protester also claimed that it was entitled to reimbursement for its bid preparation costs, damages for lost profits and overhead, and punitive damages. GAO held that the: (1) Navy properly awarded the contract to the technically superior offerer; (2) protester untimely filed its protest concerning alleged evaluation inconsistencies; (3) protester did not present any evidence of the Navy's alleged bias; and (4) protester untimely filed that portion of its protest concerning changes in the evaluation criteria. GAO also held that: (1) the protester was not entitled to reimbursement for its bid preparation costs, since the Navy acted properly in evaluating the protester's bid and awarding the contract; and (2) procurement regulations prohibited recovery of anticipated profits and punitive damages. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part, and the claim was denied.