Household Goods

An unsuccessful bidder questioned Fort Meade's decision to continue using the winning contractor to pack, crate, ship, and store personal property belonging to military personnel after learning that the contractor may have lacked necessary Interstate Commerce Commission operating authorization. Although the winning bidder's operating authorization was later vacated by a court order, GAO concludes that the Fort Meade award was neither wrong nor otherwise improper.

GAO found that: (1) the contract award was not improper; (2) the contracting officer confirmed the contractor's authorization with the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) as required; (3) the transportation officer's certificate of support accompanying the awardee's application for ICC authorization was misleading, since it implied that the Department of Defense had an immediate need for the awardee's services; (4) the solicitation requirement regarding ICC authorization for the contracts was unclear and confusing to the prospective bidders, the contracting officer, and the Fort Meade legal office; and (5) there was no need to terminate the contract and not exercise the option for 1993, since the awardee was responsibly performing the contract with proper ICC authorization.