B-241683, Oct 31, 1990, 90-2 CPD ***
Highlights
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - Dismissal - Definition DIGEST: Protest is dismissed for failure to state a valid basis of protest where protester does not allege that rejection of offer as technically unacceptable was unreasonable or that award otherwise was improper. Basic's proposal was rejected as technically unacceptable because Basic could not meet the quantity requirements of the RFP. Is an approved supplier under the Navy's Red/Yellow/Green Test Program. " and argues that its proposal should have been found acceptable as a result. This requirement contemplates that protesters will provide. The Navy rejected Basic's proposal because Basic was unable to meet the RFP quantity requirements.
B-241683, Oct 31, 1990, 90-2 CPD ***
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - Dismissal - Definition DIGEST: Protest is dismissed for failure to state a valid basis of protest where protester does not allege that rejection of offer as technically unacceptable was unreasonable or that award otherwise was improper.
Attorneys
Basic Supply Company, Inc.:
Basic Supply Company, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Metalmart, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. N00104-90-R-FM87, issued by the Department of the Navy for nickel- copper-aluminum alloy bar stock, national stock number 1H9530-01-049-7957L1.
We dismiss the protest.
According to the Navy's award notification letter, furnished with the protest, Basic's proposal was rejected as technically unacceptable because Basic could not meet the quantity requirements of the RFP. However, Basic asserts in its protest only that its proposed supplier, Inco Alloys, is an approved supplier under the Navy's Red/Yellow/Green Test Program, affording the Navy "an additional quality measure," and argues that its proposal should have been found acceptable as a result. Basic does not challenge the rejection of its proposal based on its inability to meet the quantity requirements.
Our Regulations provide that a protest shall include a detailed statement of the legal and factual grounds of protest, 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.1(c)(4) (1990), and that the grounds stated be legally sufficient. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.1(e). This requirement contemplates that protesters will provide, at a minimum, either allegations or evidence sufficient, if uncontradicted, to establish the likelihood of the protester's claim of improper agency action. Professional Medical Prods., Inc., B-231743, July 1, 1988, 88-2 CPD Para. 2.
The Navy rejected Basic's proposal because Basic was unable to meet the RFP quantity requirements. Basic has not alleged that the Navy's determination was in error, or that award to Metalmart was otherwise improper. We therefore have no basis upon which to consider Basic's protest.
The protest is dismissed.