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/gaobadbnn0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
JiL
AL
A , GA O Comptroller General
Acc untabiity * Integrity * Reliability of the United States
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
D ..
Decision
Matter of: SML Innovations
File: B-402667.2
Date: October 28, 2010
Sheryl M. Long for the protester.
Maj. Christine Fontenelle, Department of the Army, for the agency.
Eric M. Ransom, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel,
GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
Protest that solicitation's past performance criteria are unduly restrictive is denied
where the record shows that the provisions are reasonably related to the agency's
needs.
DECISION
SML Innovations protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No.
W91QUZ-10-R-0017, issued as a total small business set-aside by the Department of
the Army for Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Enterprise Application Services
(EAS) in support of the Army Enterprise Systems Integration Program. SML
challenges the relevancy criteria for offerors' past performance references.
We deny the protest.
The Army issued the RFP on July 22, 2010, for the purpose of awarding multiple
indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts for EAS services to include analysis,
design, development, deployment, fielding, and sustainment of enterprise
applications. The RFP set forth four evaluation factors, technical, past performance,
management, and price, in descending order of importance. RFP at 127. With
respect to past performance, the RFP stated that the prime offeror shall submit one
(1) but may submit up to three (3) past performance references. Id. at 118. Past
performance references were required to be current and relevant. The RFP defined
current work as work performed not more than 3 years prior to the date of the RFP's
issuance, and relevant work as work that is the same or similar in scope,
complexity, [and] magnitude as the work identified in the PWS [Performance Work](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobadbnn0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)