HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaocrptafyl0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
&VJT I?
Comptroller General
of the United States
Washington, D.C. 20548
Decision
Matter of: Rotair Industries, Inc.
File: B-276435.2
Date: July 15, 1997
Jacob B. Pompan, Esq., and Gerald H. Werfel, Esq., Pompan, Ruffner & Werfel, for
the protester.
Benjamin G. Perkins, Esq., and Niketa L. Wharton, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency,
for the agency.
Paula A. Williams, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel,
GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
Agency selection of higher-priced vendor with a shorter delivery schedule and better
past performance record was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's
evaluation scheme, which provided that where, as here, the vendor with the best
past performance history did not offer the lowest price, the agency would make a
tradeoff of price and past performance and other considerations, including delivery
schedule.
DECISION
Rotair Industries, Inc. protests the issuance of a purchase order by the Defense
Supply Center Richmond (DSCR), Defense Logistics Agency to Aero Components
Company (Aero) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP0460-97-Q-D651 for a
quantity of hoist fittings. Rotair challenges the adequacy of the best value
determination which resulted in an award to Aero.
We deny the protest.
The RFQ was issued on December 16, 1996, to qualified sources for a quantity of
58 hoist fittings identified as National Stock Number 1560-00-932-5539, Federal
Supply Class (FSC) 1560. The RFQ provided a delivery schedule calling for delivery
within 90 days ARO [after receipt of order]. If unacceptable provide best possible
delivery The RFQ advised that the best value award decision would
be based on a tradeoff between price and past performance, with price and past
performance being equally weighted. The RFQ further stated that if the vendor with
the best past performance history did not offer the lowest price, the agency would](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaocrptafyl0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)