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

LOG IN
LOG IN


B-283512.3 1 (2000-07-10)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptakyc0001 and id is 1 raw text is: t)Comptroller General of the United States United States General Accounting 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: Beneco Enterprises, Inc. File: B-283512.3 Date: July 10, 2000 Clark B. Fetzer, Esq., Kirton & McConkie, for the protester. M. Dale Marsh, Esq., Cassady, Fuller & Marsh, for Hammer LGC, Inc., the intervenor. Col. Nicholas P. Retson and Capt. Elizabeth G. Eberhart, Department of the Army, for the agency. Henry J. Gorczycki, Esq., and James Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Agency's determination that the awardee's past performance, based on the experience of one of the awardee's proposed key personnel, was equal to the extensive, successful past performance of the protester, was unreasonable and inc o nsistent with the so lic itatio n's evaluatio n scheme. DECISION Beneco Enterprises, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Hammer LGC, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. DABTO1-99-R-0002, issued by the Department of the Army for construction services at Fort Rucker, Alabama. We previously sustained Beneco's protest of an award to Hammer under this RFP in Beneco Enters., Inc., B-283512, Dec. 3, 1999, 2000 CPD __, finding that the past performance evaluation of Hammer was unreasonable, and recommending that the agency reevaluate proposals under the past performance factor and make a new source selection decision. Beneco protests that the agency's reevaluation and new source selection decision are unreasonable. We sustain the protest. The RFP, issued March 10, 1999, contemplated the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity job order contract (JOC) for the construction services for 1 year with 4 option years. RFP at B-3 to B-6 and amend. 0002, at C-1. The RFP stated that award would be based on the best overall value to the government based on the technical, past performance and price evaluation factors, with technical being somewhat more important than past performance, past