[Protest Against Army Contract Award for Storage Facility]

A firm protested an Army contract award to another firm for the construction of a storage facility, contending that the: (1) awardee would not perform the required percentage of contract work; (2) awardee did not have sufficient experience to perform the contract; and (3) Army overlooked deficiencies in the awardee's proposal during bid evaluation because of bias toward the awardee. GAO held that: (1) whether the awardee met the contract requirements was a matter of contract administration, which it would not consider; (2) the matter of the awardee's experience was one of bidder responsibility, which it would not consider because the solicitation did not contain definitive responsibility criteria; and (3) there was no evidence of bias toward the awardee on the Army's part. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.