B-184832: Mar 30, 1976

PROTEST ALLEGING THAT COMPLETELY WRITTEN SOLICITATION WAS REQUIRED - WHERE AIR FORCE BASE HAD URGENT REQUIREMENT TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDER FOR SECURITY SERVICES - IS DENIED. PROTESTER'S CONTENTION THAT ITS EXISTING CONTRACT SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IS WITHOUT MERIT. SINCE CONTRACT EXTENSION PROCEDURE IS JUST AS NONCOMPETITIVE AS ISSUING PURCHASE ORDER TO ONLY FIRM SUBMITTING QUOTATION. 2. WHETHER L...

B-184832: Jun 17, 1976

IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FILED WITH GAO UNTIL MAY 25. UAE CONTENDS THAT IT WAS NOT AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS IN THE AIR FORCE'S PROTEST REPORT. THAT OUR DECISION'S CONCLUSION ON THE USE OF A LIQUIDATED DAMAGES PROVISION WAS INCORRECT. UAE'S REQUEST WAS FILED WITH OUR OFFICE ON MAY 25. PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS: "REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION...

B-184832: Mar 30, 1976

A company protested issuance of a purchase order, alleging that the procurement was illegal and improper because there was no written solicitation, only the awardee submitted a quotation, the solicitation contained an improper penalty clause, and the procurement was classified. Since Armed Services Procurement Regulation small purchase procedures express a preference for oral solicitations of work...