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

B-281141.3 1 (1999-02-16)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptajfk0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Comptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision Matter of: Clean Service Company, Inc. File: B-281141.3 Date: February 16, 1999 David A. Nold, Esq., Young, deNormandie & Oscarsson, for the protester. LTC Richard B. O'Keeffe, Jr., and Roy L. Masengale, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. C. Douglas McArthur, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Exclusion of a proposal from the competitive range is proper based on significant informational deficiencies, even where the deficiencies stem from removal of portions of the protester's proposal in excess of a page limitation stated in the solicitation; an offeror who submits a proposal in excess of page limitations risks exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range if it cannot establish the acceptability of its approach within those limitations. DECISION Clean Service Company, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Action Service Company under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAKF57-98-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Army for cooking waste removal at Fort Lewis, Washington. Clean Service argues that the agency improperly evaluated its proposal, by ignoring all pages in excess of a page limitation established by the RFP. We deny the protest. On June 22, 1998, the agency issued the RFP for a fixed price contract for a 1-year base period, with three 1-year option periods for cleaning, disposal, and removal of waste cooking grease, grease trap, and oil/water separator and dewater digester sludge at Fort Lewis, Wash. The RFP § M.1.1.1 advised offerors that evaluators would use the criteria of section L to determine the merit of proposals; § M.2.1 advised offerors that the agency intended to make award to the best overall proposal, considering three factors, as follows: technical (quality); past performance; and price. Technical (quality) included three subfactors, as follows: equipment and management work plan that complied with the work requirement (including a requirement for a safety and health plan, (SIP)); specialized

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