About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-276860 1 (1997-07-28)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptafzu0001 and id is 1 raw text is: oComptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE A protected decision was issued on the date below and was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been redacted or approved by the parties involved for public release. Matter of: Food Services of America File: B-276860 Date: July 28, 1997 Martin P. Willard, Esq., and Richard W. Oehler, Esq., Perkins Coie, for the protester. Lynne E. Georges, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Susan McAuliffe, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that solicitation's relevant experience/past performance requirement is a definitive responsibility criterion is denied where the requirement was an evaluation factor, not a definitive responsibility criterion. 2. Protest that contracting agency's evaluation of awardee's proposal improperly considered the experience and past performance of the awardee's proposed subcontractors is denied where, given the proposed relationship of the firms, the strength of the experience cited, and the terms of the solicitation (which did not expressly prohibit consideration of the experience), there is no basis to conclude that the agency acted unreasonably in giving awardee credit for the combined experience. DECISION Food Services of America (FSA) protests the award of a contract to Sunshine Dairy Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. SP0300-96-R-M068, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), Defense Personnel Support Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for the acquisition of full line food distribution services for various delivery sites at five installations in the Spokane, Washington area. The protester contends that the awardee failed to meet a mandatory definitive responsibility criterion of the RFP and that the agency improperly evaluated the awardee's proposal.1 1FSA also alleges that the agency's issuance of amendment No. 3, which eliminated various required food items from the solicitation, was an improper relaxation of solicitation requirements for Sunshine. FSA contends that the issuance of the amendment after the receipt of Sunshine's initial proposal (which failed to comply (continued...)

What Is HeinOnline?

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.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most