[Protest of EPA Contract Award for Facilities Maintenance]

B-246604.2,B-246604.4,B-246604.5,B-246604.6: Jun 11, 1992

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contract award for facilities maintenance, contending that the awardee did not possess experience applicable to a solicitation subfactor. GAO held that: (1) EPA reasonably determined that both the awardee and protester had adequate technical experience, but made award to the awardee due to its lower bid; (2) EPA was not required to consider experience that was not comparable in size and complexity to the required services; (3) the EPA cost-realism analysis was not unreasonable, since EPA based it on the assumption that some employees would not receive vacation time; and (4) the protester was not prejudiced by any cumulative effect of errors or the failure of EPA to provide preaward notification. Accordingly, the protest was denied.

Mar 22, 2018

Mar 20, 2018

Mar 19, 2018

  • Ampcus, Inc.
    We deny the protest.
  • AMAR Health IT, LLC
    We dismiss the protest because our Office does not have jurisdiction to entertain protests of task orders issued under civilian agency multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts that are valued at less than $10 million.
  • Centurum, Inc.--Costs
    We grant the request.

Mar 15, 2018

  • ORBIS Sibro, Inc.
    We sustain the protest in part and deny it in part.

Mar 14, 2018

Mar 13, 2018

  • Interoperability Clearinghouse
    We dismiss the protest because the protester, a not-for-profit entity, is not an interested party to challenge this sole-source award to an Alaska Native Corporation under the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 8(a) program.

Looking for more? Browse all our products here