[Protest of Army Corps of Engineers Contract Award for Fire Alarm System Installation]

B-233092: Feb 21, 1989

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested an Army Corps of Engineers contract award for fire alarm system installation, contending that the: (1) Army should have awarded it the contract as the low bidder; (2) Army failed to hold meaningful discussions, since the Army never advised it of any deficiencies based on the evaluation criteria; (3) awardee's proposal was not technically superior and did not represent the greatest value to the government; (4) Army failed to consider proposed savings in an engineering change proposal it submitted with its proposal; (5) Army's best and final offer (BAFO) request letter arrived late, leaving it less time than other bidders to respond; and (6) Army improperly sent the BAFO request in the same letter transmitting its technical and management questions. GAO held that the: (1) Army properly awarded the contract, since the evaluation criteria included price; (2) Army properly conducted meaningful discussions with its letter containing technical and management questions; (3) protester failed to show that the evaluation was unreasonable or inconsistent with the evaluation scheme; (4) Army properly did not consider the change proposal, since it did not pertain to an existing contract; and (5) protester untimely filed after bid opening its protests against the BAFO letter. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.

Apr 18, 2019

Apr 17, 2019

Apr 16, 2019

Apr 15, 2019

Looking for more? Browse all our products here