Skip to main content

B-216747.2, DEC 3, 1984, 84-2 CPD 612

B-216747.2 Dec 03, 1984
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

CONTRACTORS - RESPONSIBILITY - DETERMINATION - DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA - WHAT CONSTITUTES DIGEST: SOLICITATION PROVISION WHICH STATES THAT OFFERORS MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROVE EXPERIENCE IN COMPARABLE WORK IS CONDITIONAL AND NOT SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND OBJECTIVE TO BE CONSIDERED A DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERION. WE STATED THAT OUR OFFICE DOES NOT REVIEW PROTESTS CONCERNING AFFIRMATIVE RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATIONS UNLESS THERE IS A SHOWING OF POSSIBLE FRAUD OR BAD FAITH ON THE PART OF CONTRACTING OFFICIALS OR AN ALLEGATION THAT DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MISAPPLIED. WELDTEST STATES THAT THE FOUNDATION OF ITS PROTEST IS THAT DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MISAPPLIED.

View Decision

B-216747.2, DEC 3, 1984, 84-2 CPD 612

CONTRACTORS - RESPONSIBILITY - DETERMINATION - DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA - WHAT CONSTITUTES DIGEST: SOLICITATION PROVISION WHICH STATES THAT OFFERORS MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROVE EXPERIENCE IN COMPARABLE WORK IS CONDITIONAL AND NOT SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND OBJECTIVE TO BE CONSIDERED A DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERION.

WELDTEST, INC.-- RECONSIDERATION:

WELDTEST, INC. (WELDTEST), REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION IN WELDTEST, INC., B-216747, OCT. 22, 1984, 84-2 CPD PARA. ---, DISMISSING WELDTEST'S PROTEST AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCTORA SENTOS E MATOS, LDA. (CSM). IN OUR DECISION, WE STATED THAT OUR OFFICE DOES NOT REVIEW PROTESTS CONCERNING AFFIRMATIVE RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATIONS UNLESS THERE IS A SHOWING OF POSSIBLE FRAUD OR BAD FAITH ON THE PART OF CONTRACTING OFFICIALS OR AN ALLEGATION THAT DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MISAPPLIED.

IN ITS RECONSIDERATION REQUEST, WELDTEST STATES THAT THE FOUNDATION OF ITS PROTEST IS THAT DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MISAPPLIED. WELDTEST STATES THAT PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE INSTRUCTIONS AND NOTICES OF THE SOLICITATION PROVIDES THAT OFFERORS "MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROVE THEY HAVE EXPERIENCE IN COMPARABLE WORK". WELDTEST ARGUES THAT, IF THIS HAD BEEN DONE, CSM WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AWARDED A CONTRACT UNDER THIS SOLICITATION.

DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA ARE SPECIFIC AND OBJECTIVE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY AN AGENCY FOR A PARTICULAR PROCUREMENT FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF AN OFFEROR'S ABILITY TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT. THESE SPECIAL STANDARDS OF RESPONSIBILITY LIMIT THE CLASS OF OFFERORS TO THOSE MEETING SPECIFIED QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE QUALIFICATIONS NECESSARY FOR CONTRACT PERFORMANCE, SUCH AS SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS. SEE A.R. & S. ENTERPRISES, INC., B-201924, JULY 7, 1981, 81-2 CPD PARA. 14. THE SOLICITATION CLAUSE HERE GIVES THE CONTRACTING OFFICER DISCRETION ("MAY") AS TO WHETHER TO REQUIRE PROOF OF AN UNSPECIFIED AMOUNT OR TYPE OF PRIOR EXPERIENCE. THE CLAUSE IS PERMISSIVE AND NOT SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND OBJECTIVE TO BE CONSIDERED A DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERION. SEE GAFFNY PLUMBING AND HEATING CORPORATION, B-206006, JUNE 2, 1982, 82-1 CPD PARA. 521.

SINCE NO ERROR OF FACT OR LAW HAS BEEN SHOWN, OUR PRIOR DECISION IS AFFIRMED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs