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/gaocrptaode0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
G A 0 Comptroller General
SIntegrity Reliability of the United States
~ccountabthty Inert Rea iy
United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548
Decision
Matter of: Sonetronics, Inc.
File: B-289459.2
Date March 18, 2002
Gary S. Kuskin and Debi F. Kuskin for the protester.
Mary E. Carney, Esq., Department of Justice, for the agency.
Charles W. Morrow, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
Contracting agency's past performance evaluation of awardee, based solely on a
supply contract that the awardee had yet to perform, lacks a reasonable basis and is
inconsistent with the solicitation, which required vendors to identify three
completed contracts for the past performance evaluation.
DECISION
Sonetronics, Inc. protests the issuance of a purchase order to Maranatha Industries,
Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. VC0008-02 issued by UNICOR (Federal
Prison Industries) for handsets. Sonetronics challenges the past performance
evaluation of Maranatha.
We sustain the protest.
The RFQ, issued October 19, 2001, was conducted under the simplified acquisition
and commercial items procedures contained in Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR) Parts 12 and 13. The RFQ sought quotes for an estimated 30,000 handsets for
military radios to be delivered to UNICOR, Three Rivers, Texas, under a 4-year,
fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract. The award was to be made on a
best value basis, considering past performance, technical, and price. Under the
evaluation scheme, technical and price when combined were worth 50 percent and
past performance was worth 50 percent of a 100 possible points. To assess past
performance, the RFQ (at section L.4) advised that [o]fferors must identify previous
federal, state, and local governments and private contracts that they have completed
and that are similar to the contract being evaluated. (List at least three (3) no more
than five (5) contracts for evaluation).](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaocrptaode0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)