Protest Against Contract Award

A firm protested the award of a contract and the agency determination that it was nonresponsible. The protester alleged that the awardee was nonresponsive and nonresponsible, that the agency should have conducted negotiations, and that the specifications in the request for proposals (RFP) were improper. The agency contended that the protest was untimely because it was filed with GAO more than 10 days after the protester learned of the agency's action. Although, GAO found that the majority of the protest was timely in that it was filed within 10 days of initial adverse action on a protest filed with the agency, the protest was untimely with regard to the allegation that the specifications were defective. Since any defect in the specifications was apparent prior to bid opening, the protest against it should have been filed before bid opening. Therefore, that issue was not considered. The allegation that the awardee was nonresponsible was dismissed because GAO will not review protests of affirmative determinations of responsibility without evidence that the procuring officials may have committed fraud or that the solicitation contained definitive responsibility criteria which were not applied. In this case, the protester had been the previous contractor for the laundry and cleaning services sought by this solicitation. The agency maintained that the protester repeatedly delivered fewer items than had been sent to it, and frequently supplied items of poor quality or in soiled condition. The performance deficiencies continued through the performance of two successive contracts. GAO found that the agency determination of the protester as nonresponsible was reasonable. It has previously been held that where a contractor disputes the agency's determination of nonresponsibility, GAO will not disturb that determination if it is based on what the agency reasonably perceived as the contractor's prior inadequate performance. The awardee's bid was properly viewed as responsive; the allegation that the agency should have negotiated the procurement was not considered. Accordingly, the protest was denied