The protester claimed its general construction license should have been used as evidence of its prior experience. GAO observed that regardless of the agency's use of the license, the solicitation required the prior experience to be separately described under a different subfactor anyway. Because the protester only argued the solicitation requirement was unnecessary, the protest was dismissed as untimely.
Dongjin-South Korea, GAO B-423142; B-423142.2
- Protest - The agency issued an RFP for maintenance support services at air bases in the Republic of Korea. The protester averred the agency improperly eliminated its proposal from the competition. Specifically, the protester argued the agency should have accepted its general construction license as evidence of the protester's prior experience with environmental protection services and real property management.
- Decision - GAO pointed out that even if the protester was correct, the solicitation still required offerors to separately describe their experience in those areas under the prior experience subfactor. Instead of doing so, the protester was effectively arguing the requirement was unnecessary. Since this issue was not raised before the initial due date for proposals, GAO dismissed the protest as untimely.
The protester was represented by Yong Tok Pak. The agency was represented by Jules L. Szanton of the Army. Jacob M. Talcott and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail of GAO participated in the preparation of the decision.
-- Case summary by Joshua Lim, Assistant Editor