Protest against nonresponsibility determination because of highway mail transport contractor’s poor past performance is denied; protester failed to meet its burden of proving that the contracting officer abused his discretion.
Protest against award of a contract postal unit is dismissed; third-ranked offeror lacks standing to contest the evaluation of the first-ranked offer when intervening offer is not challenged.
Protest against award of a contract for the replacement of HVAC systems is sustained. Circumstances of communications between Postal Service and protester after submission of alternate offer constituted discussions which were not conducted as procurement regulations required; pro-tester’s late revisions to alternate offer were not properly handled under contracting officer’s alternative theories that they were unsolicited revi-sions or reflected the offeror’s claim of mistake.
Protest against failure to receive construction contract is denied; contracting officer’s determination that offeror whose experience involved smaller projects and performance as subcontractor, rather than as general contractor, and whose offer was substantially less than the postal estimate and the other offers received was not responsible was not arbitrary or capricious.
Protest against various aspects of request for prequalification statements for mail transportation equipment service centers is denied. No protester has standing to challenge CBD notice’s financial responsibility standard and grouping of centers into clusters, reservation of largest cluster for noncompetitive award to experienced incumbent contractor, and refusal to extend time for the submission of statements were reasonable.
Protest against award of contract for construction of a handicap ramp is dismissed; protest was untimely received more than three months after contracting officer advised that protester’s late proposal for the work would not be considered.
Protest against award of a contract for the replacement of HVAC systems is denied where protester failed to show that the contracting officer’s de-termination that proposal was not fully responsive to solicitation was arbi-trary or an abuse of discretion; proposal clearly failed to meet requirements for documentation of offeror's qualifications.
Protest against the award of a contract for the purchase of keylocks is sustained. Determination of offer’s technical unacceptability because of offeror’s lack of quality control system at time of preaward survey was unreasonable; proper test involved question of offeror’s responsibility and its ability to obtain the necessary system, which need not have been in place at pre-award survey.
Protest against award of contract for spotter tractors is sustained in part; determination of competitive range on the basis of advantages in obtaining additional tractors similar to those previously purchased was improper because the solicitation’s stated evaluation scheme did not provide for their consideration.
Protest against a determination of nonresponsibility is denied; protester failed to show that the contracting officer's determination of his nonre-sponsibility was arbitrary, capricious, or not reasonably based on substan-tial information or that the contracting officer and other personnel had conspired to cause him to default on an earlier contract, resulting in the determination of nonresponsibility.
Protest against award to low offeror is denied; premise that low bidder, an owner/operator, must receive wages in accordance with Service Contract Act wage determination is incorrect.
Protest against award of contract for cleaning services is denied: protester who was not the low offeror failed to show that the contracting officer's decision was arbitrary or not supported by substantial evidence.
Protest against award for maintenance of electrical switchgear on grounds that awardee is not a member of the International Electrical Testing Association (NETA) and has no certified technicians is denied; protester was not the low offeror, and while NETA certification was a factor to consider in making award it was not a mandatory requirement.
Protest involving proposed sale of postal real property is dismissed; the protest jurisdiction conferred on the General Counsel by the Purchasing Manual does not extent to such disposal transactions.
Protest of the award of a contract for technical personnel services is dismissed and denied. Challenge to "best value" evaluation scheme is untimely; evaluation of protester’s offer was consistent with solicitation and fact that successful offeror’s price was higher than protester’s did not preclude award.
Protest from offeror on solicitation mailing list of failure to receive solicitation is sustained in part. Offeror holding local interim vehicle washing agreement was not incumbent contractor entitled to receive solicitation, but to the extent that it was denied solicitation for subjective reasons unrelated to equitable rotation of mailing list, failure to solicit was inappropriate
Protest against award of contract for health examinations is denied; with one exception, evaluation of protester’s proposal was reasonable, and adjustment of evaluation with regard to the exception would not have required a different award result.
Protest of the award of a contract postal unit contract is dismissed as untimely; purchasing specialist’s initial oral advice of intent to award to another established basis for protest
Protest against failure to consider late bids is denied where the protester did not establish that their lateness was the result of the Postal Service’s improper action.
Protest against award of contract for parking lot expansion is denied: protester failed to show that the contracting officer's determination of its nonresponsibility was arbitrary, capricious, or not reasonably based on substantial information or that that the contracting officer had discriminated against protester in making the award.
Protest against issuance of a purchase order for vehicle step grates is denied; protester’s suspicion that its quotation was disclosed to the successful quoter is unsupported by record, which indicates that successful quoter offered its published price for the grates it proposed
Protest against award for food vending services on grounds that awardee did not offer the best value is denied; protester’s contention that its price was lower failed to consider prices for all vending sites.