Written in English
|Contributions||United States. General Accounting Office.|
protests the rejection of its proposal as technically unacceptable under, and the simultaneous cancellation of, request for proposals (RFP) No. FR, a small disadvantaged business set-aside issued by the Department of the Air Force for travel services at bases in Nevada and Idaho, By letter dated Octo , the agency. because its bid acceptance period had expired: and 3) the protest is untimely under our Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. 5 (a)(2), because it was not filed within 10 days after bid opening when TCA knew or should have known of its failure to receive the amendment. We disagree with the Air Force's procedural arguments. Eastern Maintenance and Services, Inc. protests the rejection of its bid under invitation for bids (IFB) No. FB, issued J for shelf stocking and custodial services at the commissary at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado. The Air Force rejected Eastern Maintenance's bid on grounds that the bid bond. After bid opening, the protester submitted a signed replace-ment certificate. Cryptek's bid, however, was rejected by the Air Force, by letter of May 9, as nonresponsive. On Cryptek filed a protest with our Office challenging the rejection of its bid. The protester contends that since it filled in the requested.
STR Painting, Inc., protests the rejection of its bid under invitation for bids (IFB) No. FB-A, issued by the Air Force for construction work to include the removal and replacement of screen doors and frames for military family housing located at Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii. We sustain the protest. New Our Bid Protest Regulations provide that we will not consider a protest challenging a procurement conducted on the basis of competitive proposals, where a debriefing is required if the protest is filed before the debriefing date offered to the protester; the protest instead should be filed not later than 10 days after the debriefing. 4 C.F.R. § (a)(2). There is no indication, however, that the Air Force engaged in a meaningful consideration of the capabilities of other potential sources, before drafting the J&A, to support its conclusion that CMAS support services are unique Thus, the Air Force’s determination that Harris was the one responsible source for CMAS support services was. However, even a routine bid protest takes time and money to address and many of those can be avoided by following some—or all—of the recommendations in Part II on Avoiding Bid Protests. As for the bid protests that cannot be (or are not) 1. Labor Code § , enacted by SB (Stat. ), provides that a public agency.
Pais Janitorial Service & Supplies, Inc. protests the rejection of its proposal under request for proposals (RFP) No. FR, issued by the Department of the Air Force for janitorial services. The protester contends that the agency should not have rejected its proposal without referring. The protest involved a request for proposals (RFP) issued by the Department of the Air Force for launch operations and infrastructure support services at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The RFP contemplated the award of a hybrid contract with both fixed-price and cost . Date: Decem DECISION Tr-Ark Industries, Inc. protests its exclusion from the competitive range by the Department of the Air Force under request for proposals No. FR for custodial support services at Wright-Patterson Air Force base. Subsequent to the filing of this protest, the agency has granted the relief requested. Loomacres, Inc. v. United States, No. C (Feb. 21, ) (unsuccessful protest against insourcing decision; OMB Circular A does not govern procurements of services that are necessary for the implementation or enforcement of an Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan, and the Air Force was required to give priority to a federal.