B-215873: Feb 4, 1985

A firm protested a solicitation for dredging services issued by the Army Corps of Engineers and contract award to any other firm, contending that the solicitation specifications were unduly restrictive. The protester's bid had been rejected as nonresponsive because it offered equipment other than that required by the solicitation specifications. A contracting agency has the primary responsibility...

B-215873: Feb 4, 1985

BIDS - EVALUATION - TECHNICAL ADEQUACY - ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION DIGEST: PROTEST THAT AGENCY UNDULY RESTRICTED COMPETITION IN DETERMINING THAT HOPPER DREDGE WAS REQUIRED TO PERFORM WORK IS DENIED WHERE PROTESTER DISAGREES WITH AGENCY'S TECHNICAL CONCLUSIONS BUT HAS NOT SHOWN THAT THE AGENCY'S CONCLUSIONS ARE UNREASONABLE. WHERE THE PROCURING AGENCY HAS ESTABLISHED PRIMA FACIE SUPPORT FOR THE...