Matter of: Amcep, Inc. File: B-259716.2 Date: January 13, 1995

B-259716.2: Jan 13, 1995

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

The jurisdiction of our Office is established by the bid protest provisions of the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984. Our role in resolving bid protests is to ensure that the statutory requirements for full and open competition are met. These requirements contemplate that protesters will provide. To establish the likelihood that the protester will prevail in its claim of improper agency action. Amcep states that it protests because the "bid is not in the best interest of the government and the taxpayer. [The] bid is not full free competition to small business owners." further information or supporting documentation. The protest is dismissed.

Matter of: Amcep, Inc. File: B-259716.2 Date: January 13, 1995

(no digest)

DECISION

Amcep, Inc. protests the terms of the invitation for bids (IFB) No. 31- 5644 issued by the Defense Logistics Agency.

The protest, as filed with our Office, does not establish a basis for challenging the agency's action and, accordingly, must be dismissed.

The jurisdiction of our Office is established by the bid protest provisions of the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, 31 U.S.C. Secs. 3551-3556 (1988 and Supp. V 1993). Our role in resolving bid protests is to ensure that the statutory requirements for full and open competition are met. Brown Assocs. Mgmt. Servs.. Inc.--Request for Recon., B-235906.3, Mar. 16, 1990, 90-1 CPD Para. 299.

To achieve this end, our Bid Protest Regulations require that a protest include a detailed statement of the legal and factual grounds of a protest, 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.1(c)(4), and that the grounds stated be legally sufficient. 4 C.E.R. Sec. 21.1(e). These requirements contemplate that protesters will provide, at a minimum, either allegations or evidence sufficient, if uncontradicted, to establish the likelihood that the protester will prevail in its claim of improper agency action. Robert Wall Edge--Request for Recon., 68 Comp.Gen. 352 (1989), 89-1 CPD Para. 335.

Here, Amcep states that it protests because the "bid is not in the best interest of the government and the taxpayer, due to the ambiguity of item #2.... [The] bid is not full free competition to small business owners." further information or supporting documentation. Therefore, this protest does Amcep provides no not include sufficient factual information to establish the likelihood that the agency here violated applicable procurement laws or regulations.

The protest is dismissed.