1996 Digest

Protest against removal from prequalified list for lobby renovation contracts is denied; protester’s less than satisfactory performance on first phase of work justifies its exclusion from subsequent phases.

Protest against award of construction contract is denied; no harm resulted from exclusion of protester's offer from those best technically qualified, since solicitation provided for selection from acceptable offers on the basis of price, including aggregate offers on this solicitation and two others, and awardee's aggregate offers were lower than any combination of offers including protester's offer.

Protest against removal from prequalified list for lobby renovation contracts is denied; protester’s less than satisfactory performance on first phase of work justifies its exclusion from subsequent phases.

Protest against nonresponsibility determination is dismissed in part and denied in part where the determination was based on substantial evidence and was not arbitrary or unreasonable.

Protest against noncompetitive issuance of ordering agreement for automatic call distribution systems is sustained; "unusual and compelling urgency" cited in justification is not demonstrated, and price advantage obtained by incorporating pricing from vendor's larger contract with another agency does not establish that purchase is in the interest of the Postal Service where other sources exist, but their technical or price alternatives were not investigat-ed or evaluated.

Protest against nonresponsibility determination is denied where it was not an abuse of discretion for the contracting officer to base the determination on information indicating that recent performance on similar contract was poor.

Protest against rejection of all mail transportation bids as excessive in price is denied; contracting officer could properly determine that offers more than twice those of comparable routes were excessive.

Protest of decision to award contract for security guard services subsequent to initial protest to contracting officer is dismissed as untimely received more than ten working days after adverse action on initial protest or after basis for protest should have been known

Protest against award of contract for construction project is denied where contracting officer's determination that protester's proposal was technically unacceptable for failure to identify three prior projects of similar size was reasonable

Protest against award of an acrylic retail fixtures supply contract to higher-priced offeror is denied where protester's low technical score precluded its proposal from being considered the best value.

Protest contending that contracting officer improp-erly applied excessive standard of responsibility to offeror is denied; offeror's conditioning of offer on award by date which had passed when determination was made was sufficient to support the determination

Protest contending that contracting officer improp-erly found bidder nonresponsible for highway transportation contract is denied; reasonable basis for determination has been shown.

Protest against nonresponsibility determination is denied where contracting officer reasonably based it on lack of required quality control system and previous poor performance on postal contracts.

Protest against terms of solicitation for cafeteria services is denied; Randolph-Sheppard Act and its implementing regulations do not support State Licensing Agency's contentions that vending machines which comprise part of the solicited cafeteria should be made available for blind operation under license or that income from those machines should be distributed to the blind licensee.

Request for reconsideration is denied where grounds for reconsideration reiterate contentions previously made in the course of the protest or present new grounds which could have been, but were not, previously raised.

Back to Purchasing Protest Decisions Homepage