About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline



B-400145.2 1 (2008-08-18)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadaop0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 




         G    A     0Comptroller General
c      Accountability * Integrity * Reliability                      of the United States
United States Government Accountability Office    DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Washington, DC 20548 The decision issued on the date below was subject to a
                                                    GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been
                                                    approved for public release.

          Decision

          Matter of:  Ahntech-Korea Company, Ltd.

          File:       B-400145.2

          Date:       August 18, 2008

          Leigh T. Hansson, Esq., Gregory S. Jacobs, Esq., and Steven D. Tibbets, Esq., Reed
          Smith LLP, for the protester.
          Megan E. Stephens, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency.
          Jacqueline Maeder, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel,
          GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
          DIGEST

          Protest that agency improperly evaluated protester's experience is denied where
          record shows agency properly determined that protester did not have 3 years of
          relevant experience, as required by solicitation, and experience of protester's parent
          company could not properly be considered because proposal did not establish that
          parent company's resources were committed to contract performance.
          DECISION

          Ahntech-Korea Company, Ltd. protests the award of a contract to Kyungil Industrial
          Development Co., Ltd. under request for proposals (RFP) No. W91QVN-08-R-0010,
          issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Contracting Command Korea
          (CCK), for civil engineering services at several U.S. Army bases that serve the United
          States Forces Korea. Ahntech-Korea principally asserts that its proposal was
          improperly determined to be technically unacceptable based on a failure to
          demonstrate adequate experience.

          We deny the protest.

          The solicitation, issued December 21, 2007, contemplated the award of a fixed-price
          requirements contract for civil engineering services, including customer support,
          infrastructure and facility maintenance, physical plant operations, civil engineering
          support, environmental protection, engineering support, and property management,
          at six U.S. Army locations in Korea, for a 1-month phase-in/transition period, a base
          year, and four 1-year option periods. RFP at 3-68. Award was to be made to the
          offeror submitting the lowest-priced, technically acceptable proposal based on
          consideration of three evaluation factors: technical (comprised of three subfactors--