Protest Alleging Restrictive Specifications

A company protested any award under a solicitation, alleging that certain requirements in the solicitation unduly restricted competition and that the low bid was nonresponsive. The low bid which was stamped confidential was nonresponsive since the stamp restricted public disclosure of the information in the bid and afforded the bidder the opportunity, after bid opening, of accepting or refusing award. Although the absence of any responsive bids required resolicitation of the requirements, the protest concerning the restrictiveness of the requirements was considered since it seemed apparent that the resolicitation would be on essentially the same specifications. The resolicitation should utilize brand name or equal provisions specified in the Federal Procurement Regulations; specifications for a specific operating system should be modified to permit bidders with similar operating systems to demonstrate capabilities to meet the agency's performance requirements; and there should be a reevaluation of barring computer operator priority reset to consider the possible economic benefits in using it.