Carter Chevrolet Agency, Inc.

Carter Chevrolet Agency, Inc. BNUMBER: B-270962; B-270962.2 DATE: May 1, 1996 TITLE: Carter Chevrolet Agency, Inc. ********************************************************************** Matter of:Carter Chevrolet Agency, Inc. File: B-270962; B-270962.2 Date:May 1, 1996 Robert H. Koehler, Esq., and Lynn T. Burleson, Esq., Patton Boggs, L.L.P., for the protester. Seth Binstock, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Behn Miller, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that agency improperly determined that awardee satisfied a definitive responsibility criterion requiring it to provide letter of commitment from automobile manufacturer is denied where the agency reasonably determined that letter of commitment constituted evidence of manufacturer's agreement to provide required vehicles in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation. 2. Protest that agency improperly allowed awardee to demonstrate compliance with definitive responsibility criterion after time set for submission of best and final offers is denied since evidence of compliance with matters of responsibility--such as definitive responsibility criteria--may be provided any time up to actual award. 3. General Accounting Office will not consider challenges to contracting officer's affirmative determination of awardee's responsibility absent evidence of bad faith; protester's contention that contracting officer improperly failed to further investigate awardee's responsibility based on protester's unsubstantiated allegations of impropriety by awardee does not meet this standard. DECISION Carter Chevrolet Agency, Inc. protests the award of a contract to McCombs Fleet Services, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. FCAP-X2-FLT96-N, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) to obtain commercially available two-wheel drive and four-wheel drive "light" trucks and similar passenger vehicles. Carter contends that the agency improperly waived a definitive responsibility criterion for the awardee, and that the contracting officer otherwise improperly determined McCombs to be a responsible contractor. We deny the protest. The RFP was issued on August 18, 1995, and contemplated the award of multiple firm, fixed-price requirements contracts to the lowest priced, technically acceptable offeror for each "group" of vehicle contract line item numbers (CLIN), which were organized in the RFP's pricing schedule according to vehicle specifications and manufacturer. At issue in this protest is the award of Group 17, which required offerors to provide various quantities of two-wheel drive passenger vans manufactured by General Motors Corporation (GMC). By the October 4 closing date, McCombs and Carter submitted proposals for various CLIN vehicle groups; with respect to Group 17, the protester and McCombs were the sole offerors. On November 8, the contracting officer issued a facsimile letter to McCombs advising the firm that several technical deviations in its offer were unacceptable. On November 17, GSA issued an amendment to the RFP which revised several of the RFP's vehicle specifications, established a time for submission of best and final offers (BAFO), and--of significance to this protest--required all nonmanufacturer offerors to submit a manufacturer's letter of commitment with their BAFOs demonstrating that each manufacturer of the proposed vehicles had committed itself to act as the offeror's source of supply for that vehicle group. With its BAFO, McCombs submitted commitment letters from the following manufacturers: GMC Truck, Pontiac, Jeep, and Ford Motor Company. Although the commitment letter for Group 17 was submitted by GMC Truck on a letter specifically addressed to "McCombs Fleet Services," the commitment letters from the other vehicle manufacturers were addressed to different entities--i.e., "McCombs Jeep Eagle/Fleet Services" and "McCombs Pontiac-GMC." On December 7, the contracting officer issued a letter to McCombs advising it that the commitment letters from Ford, Jeep, and Pontiac were deficient as they were not addressed to McCombs by the name on its proposal--McCombs Fleet Services. Additionally, with respect to the commitment letter from GMC Truck, the contracting officer advised McCombs that the commitment was deficient because it "fails to identify the items for which you are submitting an offer and indicates [vehicle] shortages and a cut-off date."[1] The contracting officer directed McCombs to verify its BAFO--including correcting the letters of commitment--by December 11. On December 13, by means of a facsimile letter, McCombs requested additional time from the contracting officer to correct its GMC Truck commitment letter.