The protester objected to weaknesses, arguing it was the incumbent, so the agency knew its approach was acceptable. GAO said incumbency is not a substitute for a well-written proposal.
SamKnows, Inc., GAO B-421595
- Data Storage – The agency assessed the protester a weakness for not storing data on servers located in the U.S. The protester objected, reasoning it was the incumbent, and the agency had already validated its storage practices. GAO rejected the argument. The agency was not required to evaluate based on ihow the protester performed the incumbent contract. The protester hadn’t shown how it planned to store data on U.S. servers, which was a solicitation requirement.
- Whitebox – The protester complained it had been wrongly penalized for it placement of a data detection device called a whitebox. The protester argued it was incumbent, so the should’ve known where the protester would place the whitebox. GAO wasn’t buying it. A incumbent is not excused from writing a clear proposal.
- Experience – The protester objected to a weakness it received for an unclear explanation of its experience with mobile wireless. GAO found the negative assessment was warranted. One could not readily discern how much experience the protester had from the proposal.
The protester is represented by Alex Salter. The agency is represented by Kelly Zeng and Hilary Martinson of the Federal Communications Commission. GAO attorneys Kyle E. Gilbertson and Peter H. Tran participated in the decision.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
