Allegation That Awardee Cannot Perform at Bid Price

A firm protested the award of an Army contract to supply four flavors of noncarbonated beverages, and furninshing, installing and maintaining the beverage dispensers. The protester contended that the beverages offered by the awardee did not meet the invitation for bid's (IFB) specifications as to the natural fruit juice content, and that the bid should have been rejected as nonresponsive. Further, the protester contended that the awardee was in violation of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations because its beverages were mislabeled as to the type of sweetener used, and questioned the ability of the awardee to profitably deliver acceptable beverages at the stated bid price. A bid is deemed responsive if it represents an offer to perform to the exact specifications in the IFB. Thus, the Government's acceptance of the bid legally obligated the awardee to supply the beverages in accordance with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation. The protest on this issue was denied. As to the allegation that the awardee mislabeled the items in violation of FDA regulations, the protester had the burden to affirmatively prove its case. GAO concluded that the allegation was unsupported and the protester failed its burden in this regard. The protest on this issue was also denied. The question of the awardee's responsibility was a matter of contract administration, which is a function of the contracting agency, and not for consideration by GAO. Therefore, this part of the protest was dismissed. Finally, whether the awardee was capable of delivering acceptable beverages was also a question of contract administration, and not for consideration by GAO. This part of the protest was denied.