Latvian Connection LLC Shareefa Complex 5th Floor Kuwait City, Kuwait Tel: 001 965 950 50 775

June 29, 2013 BY REGISTERED EMAIL

General Counsel Government Accounting Office 441 G Street, NW Washington DC 20548 Email: Protests@gao.gov Attn: Procurement Law Control Group, Room 1139

RE:

Pre-Award Protest against the Army Contracting Command, MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord FEDBID BUY (495787 ) UNAWARD-13-Q-4807

Dear Procurement Law Group: Latvian Connection General Trading and Construction LLC, ( LC LLC), Shareefa Complex, 5th Floor, Kuwait City, Kuwait, tel: [001 965 5012 2072]. Email: [keven.barnes@LatvianConnectionLLC.com] , a SAMS Registered company ( DUNS 830587791 and CAGE 5GLB3, with a LOCAL office in Kuwait, DUNS 534749622 and CAGE SGM59 submits this Pre- Award Protest against this FEDBID.com listing because there is no Brand Justification Approval posted or cited and the contracting officer has a contradictory posting that says that EXACT is required for all three line items, yet one line items states that or similar would be accepted in the FEDBID posting. This solicitation fails to meet the FAR requirements of a solicitation and the solicitation also fails to give the Contracting Officer name, email, or phone number. FEDBID has chosen to act as a go between for solicitation communications and even places Clientservices@fedbid.com where the contracting officers name would appear on www.fbo.gov which appears as follows. When FEDBID.com was asked through their SUBMIT questions button they did submit the questions to request clarifications about the contradiction within the solicitation and questions about line items 2 and 3. FEDBID.com stated that the contracting officer didnt wish to answer questions ( Exhibit 2 ) regarding quantities, Brand Name Only, provide the Brand of Line Item 2 where only a part number was given.
The MICC Joint Base Lewis McChord requires the following items, Exact Match Only, to the following: LI 001: Alcotest 9510 Device Alcotest 9510 Device Power cord Dust cover Cable channel cover External keyboard 25 mouthpieces Washington specific device software Printer (Brother HL 5240 or similar), 3, EA; LI 002: Locking Dry Gas Enclosure Part No. 4412010: Locking Dry Gas Enclosure (including 2 regulators, 2 transducers and 2 58L dry gas standards), 3, EA; LI 003: Bar Code Reader Part No. 4412028: E-Seek Model 200 2D PDF 417 Bar code Reader (including serial cable and power supply), 3, EA; LI 004: Shipping and Handling, 1, EA;

This GAO Pre Award Protest is submitted on June 29, 2013 and prior to the bid due in date of July 1, 2013.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 4 C.F.R. 21.1 (c ) (1), the relevant electronic mail address for this protest is keven.barnes@LatvianConnectionLLC.com ( Representative for the Protester Latvian Connection General Trading and Construction LLC) The Contracting Pre-Award Branch Chief is Mr. Clifford E. Jackson ( Exhibit 5) FEDBID.com is not releasing the Buyer or Contracting Officers name or contact information and not requiring a contracting officers name or contact information the FEDBID platform. FEDBID has an email of ClientServices.com. MICC Joint Base Lewis McChords contracting office has a phone number of 253-966-3480 and an address of MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Directorate of Contracting, Building 2015, Box 339500, Fort Lewis, WA 98433-9500

2|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 Per FAR 33.103 Protests to the agency (2) Latvian Connection LLC Shareefa Complex Kuwait City, Kuwait Representative of Protester: Keven Barnes, CEO Email keven.barnes@LatvianConnectionLLC.com The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) should sustain this protest, stay the performance of the Contract, and direct that MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord clarify the solicitation contradictions and questions that supplies the missing information such as quantities of Line Item 1 where there are imbedded quantities,( EXHIBIT 1) and whether that line item is a sole brand or will a similar brand be acceptable; Line Item 2 state the brand and if it is brand name or equal; and Line Item 3 state if that is Brand Name or Equal. If the contracting officers intention was that it is EXACT only, then there is no Justification and Approval that states why that is the case posted on either www.fbo.gov that has a link to www.fedbid.com in the form of a Justification and Approval . On another solicitation from MICC Joint Base Lewis-McChord with a similar solicitation number on www.fbo.gov, UNAWRD-13-Q-5920; the contracting officer has posted a Justification and Approval. (EXHIBIT 4 & 5) The GAO should also instruct MICC Joint Base Lewis McChord to put on this solicitation and other solicitations their contracting officers contact information. FEDBID is a platform just as FEDBIZOPPS is and the GSA does not act as a go between to Contracting Officers and neither should FEDBID.com place themselves in a position of being a contracting officer that answers questions, makes clarifications, or in any way interferes with the communication to contracting officers which only serves to delay responses. MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord has allowed another GSA SAM.gov registered vendor, FEDBID, Inc. (EXHIBIT 3) to take questions which are supposedly given to the contracting officer and the contracting officer has stated, without Latvian Connection LLC ever seeing the exact questions posed to the contracting officer and without seeing the contracting officers actual response that the contracting officer has refused to answer the questions or make the clarifications. FEDBID has been delegated the authority to act in place of the contracting officer and answer questions, yet FEDBID.com cannot answer the questions. (EXHIBIT 1) FEDBID, Incs site doesnt require contracting officers to post their names or contact information and instead place themselves as a go between to the contracting officer. The contracting officer conducting this solicitation has told FEDBID representative, Brad Hungerman that they will not answer the questions or make clarifications. (Exhibit 6) It seems that any person with a buyers account could be conducting solicitations on behalf of the US Government and that the requirement of a warranted contracting officer has been delegated to FEDBID despite the obligations imposed on a contracting officer through the Federal Acquisition Regulations to conduct solicitations through FAR Part 12, 13 & 15. Public Law 98-369, CICA, mandates that competition be sought in the Federal procurement process, and as a result of CICA, contract solicitations in which competition is to be limited require that a J&A be executed establishing the reason for less than full and open competition. J&As are required by statute and cannot be waived. INTERESTED PARTY STATUS As discussed below LC LLC seeks to compete for the contract that the proposed RFQ (Exhibit 1and 1a). Latvian Connection LLC incorporates all the below facts and (Exhibits) into this Interested Party Status section. Further, if this protest is sustained and MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord evaluates Latvian Connections timely proposal submitted to the FEDBID platform, with clarified Brands, quantities, and the knowledge of whether Brand Name or Equal is applicable to the solicitation; then Latvian Connection LLC, a VOSB, and a responsible offeror will have a reasonable chance of winning the Contract under Full and Open Competition that is Set-Aside for U.S. Small Businesses only. Therefore, Latvian Connection LLC is an actual offeror whose direct economic interest is affected by the award of the Contract and hence, an interested party. 31 U.S.C. 3551 (2000); FAR 33.101; 4 C.F.R. 21.0(a)(2006); Designer Assoc. , Inc.,B-293226, FEB 12, 2004 C.P.D. 114 at 2.

3|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 TIMELINESS OF THIS PROTEST The Pre-Award protest against MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord is against FEDBID posting Buy #495787 (Exhibit 1), solicitation No. UNAWARD-13-Q-4807 ( Exhibit 2) 21.2 Time for filing.(a)(1) Protests based upon alleged improprieties in a solicitation which are apparent prior to bid opening or the time set for receipt of initial proposals shall be filed prior to bid opening or the time set for receipt of initial proposals. In procurements where proposals are requested, alleged improprieties which do not exist in the initial solicitation but which are subsequently incorporated into the solicitation must be protested not later than the next closing time for receipt of proposals following the incorporation, and the bid is due in July 1, 2013 at 12:00 Eastern Standard Time and currently showing on FEDBID.com (Exhibit 1) FACTUAL GROUNDS OF THE PROTEST 1. The RFQ The MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord has issued the RFQ UNAWARD-13-Q-4807 on June 19, 2013 on FBO with a reverse auction linked to FEDBID.com with a Buy No. of 495787. The solicitation is being conducted Full and Open Competition under FAR Part 12, but the contracting officer has stated in Amendment issued on FBO on 25 JUN 2013 that exact match only ( Exhibit 8 ) without citing by what authority to restrict the competition to a sole brand and a sole source. The solicitation shows on FEDBID.com under the section Bidding Requirements that:

Exact Match Only: The Buyer requires that Sellers bid 'exact match to spec'. That means that NO SUBSTITUTIONS are allowed. Sellers MUST provide the item requested in the line item description (exact make, model, part number and or description). If you are not able to deliver the line item as requested, DO NOT BID. Please advise the Buyer of issues through our 'Submit a Question' button.
Line Item 001 shows that: Alcotest 9510 Device Alcotest 9510 Device Power cord Dust cover Cable channel cover External keyboard 25 mouthpieces Washington specific device software Printer (Brother HL 5240 or similar)

001

Quantity 3

The printer states that Brother HL 5240 or similar. That is a contradiction that Latvian Connection LLC sought to clarify.
002 Locking Dry Gas Enclosure Part No. 4412010: Locking Dry Gas Enclosure (including 2 regulators, 2 transducers and 2 58L dry gas standards) Quantity 3

There is no brand stated on this to go along with the Part Number and that was a clarification being sought from the contracting officer. 003
Bar Code Reader Part No. 4412028: E-Seek Model 200 2D PDF 417 Bar code Reader (including serial cable and power supply)

Quantity 3

Latvian Connection LLC sought to clarify the voltage of the power supply

4|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 Under the:
Buy Terms
Name Description

SUPPLY AND SMALL SERVICES BRANCH INSTRUCTION 1CONTRACTING OFFICER'S AUTHORITY

The Contracting Officer (KO) at Mission and Installtion contracting Office, Joint Base LewisMcChord is the only person authorized to approve changes or modify any of the requirements under this contract, and notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this contract, the said authority remains solely with the KO. In the event the Contractor or contract employee effects any such change at the direction of any person other than the KO, the change will be considered to have been without authority, and no adjustment will be made in the contract price under the Changes clause or any other clause to cover any increase in costs incurred as a result thereof.

This is clear that only the contracting officer authorized to approve changes or to modify any requirement and that nothing that FEDBID, Inc. does could replace the authority of the contracting officer. The contracting officers name, email address, and phone number should have been available for Latvian Connection LLC to write directly to the contracting officer to ask these questions and clarification. SUPPLY AND SMALL SERVIES BRANCH INSTRUCTION 2 AGENCY PROTEST If an interested party have complaints about this procurement, it is preferable that you first attempt to resolve those concerns with the responsible contracting officer. However, you can also officially protest to the contracting officer. Contract award or performance is suspended during the protest. To be timely, protests must be filed within the periods specified in FAR 33.103. If an interested party has complaints or want to file a protest it must be sent to the address below: Mission and Installation Contracting Command Chief, Supply and Small Services Branch BOX 339500, MS 19 JBLM, WA 98433-9500 Facsimile number 253-967-3844

Latvian Connection LLC did make 2 attempts to ask FEDBID to contact the contracting officer, but the contracting officer has failed to give their contact information. SUPPLY AND SMALL SERVIES BRANCH INSTRUCTION 8 - CONTACT INFORMATION Contact ClientServices @ FedBid.com or call 1-877-9FEDBID to address any questions for quotes utilizing FedBid. Contact the specialist listed in the solicitation to address any questions concerning any other request for quotes.

The Contracting Officer has given authority to FEDBID to address any questions and states to contact the specialist, which can only be assumed is a Contracting Specialist for which there is no contact information given by the contracting officer. This solicitation is stated to be under This is a Request for Quotes under Federal Acquisition Regulation 12, Acquisition of
Commercial Items using FAR 13 Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

5|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 II. Latvian Connection LLCs Proposal

Latvian Connection LLC, a Small Business Administration registered company that is a Veteran-Owned Business (VOSB), the solicitation is exclusively set-aside for U.S. Small Business. Latvian Connection LLC supplier has asked for the clarifications to Brand, quantity so that an informed quotation could be made. If the ambiguities and contradictions in the solicitation were clarified and corrected, then Latvian Connection LLC could make a bid based on accurate information. Request of a ruling by the Comptroller General of the United States The Contracting Office from MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord have not provided, or stated they were conducting a solicitation that is Other than Full and Open competition under FAR Part 6. ( EXHIBITS 1 & 2 ) Latvian Connection LLC requests that that the solicitation be extended and the contradictions regarding Brand Name or Equal clarified and the Brand of Line Item 2 be clarified. If the solicitation is being conducted to restrict the Brand then the contracting officer should cite a Justification and Approval under FAR Part 6 and state the reasons that no other Brand will be acceptable. REQUEST FOR HEARING OR CONFERENCE AND PROTECTIVE ORDER If the issues in this case cannot be resolved on the basis of the documents requested, then Latvian Connection LLC requests a hearing on all of the matters set forth above. 4 C.F.R. 21.1 (d)(2008). LC LLC does not request a protective order. LEGAL GROUNDS OF PROTEST I. There is Overwhelming Evidence of Latvian Connection LLC that the MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord Contracting Office in the state of Washington are conducting solicitation that has ambiguous terms and conditions and limiting competition to only one brand without Justification and Approval for why. The contracting officer has deferred his contracting authority to answer questions to a vendor, FEDBID Incorporated instead of fulfilling their obligation under the Federal Acquisition Regulations to list themselves in the solicitation and provide their contact information in order to answer question directly to Latvian Connection LLC. The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 requires full and open competition in government procurements except where otherwise specifically allowed by the statute. 10 U.S.C. 2304(a)(1)(A) (2006). One exception to this competition requirement is where the agencys requirements can be performed by only one or a limited number of sources. 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1); Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-1. Where, as here, an agency uses non-competitive procedures it is required to execute a written J&A with sufficient facts and rationale to support the use of the cited authority. See 10 U.S.C. 2304(f)(1); FAR 6.302-1; Signals & Sys., Inc., B-288107, Sept. 21, 2001, 2001 CPD 168 at 9. The GAO has long held that prospective vendors have an affirmative duty to make every reasonable effort to obtain solicitation materials. USA Info. Sys., Inc., B-291488, Dec. 2, 2002, 2002 CPD para. 205 at 3; American Material Handling, Inc., B-281261, Jan. 19, 1999, 99-1 CPD para. 13 at 2; see Upside Down Prods., B-243308, July 17, 1991, 91-2 CPD para. 66 at 3. Latvian Connection LLC has sought to have the contradictory terms of the solicitation materials clarified, and the contracting officer has placed a bidding platform, FEDBID Inc., in a position to provide those materials and allow the bidding platform to answer questions on the contracting officers behalf.

II.

III.

6|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 IV.
Under our Bid Protest Regulations, a solicitation defect apparent on the face of the solicitation must be protested prior to the time set for receipt of initial proposals or quotations, when it is most practicable to take effective action against such defects. 4 C.F.R. 21.2(a)(1) (2013). Furthermore, an offeror who chooses to compete under a patently ambiguous solicitation does so at its own peril, and cannot later complain when the agency proceeds in a way inconsistent with one of the possible interpretations. Wackenhut Servs., Inc., B-276012.2, Sept. 1, 1998, 98-2 CPD 75 at 5; CardioMetrix, B-274585, Nov. 18, 1996, 96-2 CPD 190 at 3; Watchdog, Inc., B-258671, Feb. 13, 1995, 95-1 CPD 69 at 5. Latvian Connection LLC has sought to have the solicitation defects clarified and corrected so that LCLLC could make an informed bid. Latvian Connection LLC has had its communications to the contracting officer interfered with by the bidding platform FEDBID.com not having the contracting officers name available and by FEDBID Inc taking over one of the functions of a contracting officer clarifying solicitation requirements. The contracting officer had a duty to provide the interpretation and justify a sole brand only with a Justification and Approval as well as state the brand of Line Item 2. A solicitation ambiguity exists where two or more reasonable interpretations of the terms of the solicitation are possible. Ashe Facility Servs., Inc., B-292218.3, B-292218.4, Mar. 31, 2004, 2004 CPD para. 80 at 10. There is a complete contradiction in Line Item 1 in that the printer could be similar or it has to be EXACT as the FEDBID platform states. Solicitation provisions must be sufficiently definite and free from ambiguity so as to permit competition on a common basis. Media Funding, Inc. d/b/a Media Visions, Inc., B-265642, B265642.2, Oct. 20, 1995, 95-2 CPD 185 at 3. In any event, in order for an ambiguity--patent or latent-- to exist, the language leading to the alleged ambiguity must be shown to have two or more reasonable meanings. DeLancey Printing, B-277698, Nov. 12, 1997, 97-2 CPD para. 139 at 3. Here, the language is reasonably susceptible only to the meaning that it is a request for information, not that it is a requirement. (East Slope Conservation Services, B-282661.2, July 9, 1999) This solicitation has one interpretation that the word similar and the lack of a Justification and Approval citing a sole brand could mean that Or Equal is what is meant by the contracting officer or that the contracting officer did mean EXACT except that there is no Justification and Approval for the EXACT Brand and Line Item 2 is lacking a brand at all. Where a request for quotations invites competition, vendors must be given sufficient detail to allow them to compete intelligently and on a relatively equal basis; the agencys description of its needs must be free from ambiguity and describe the agencys minimum needs accurately. Am. Overseas Book Co., Inc., B-276675, July 10, 1997, 97-2 CPD 12 at 2; see Richen Mgmt., LLC, B-406750, B-406850, July 31, 2012, 2012 CPD 215 at 4. Finally, A patent ambiguity imposes the duty of inquiry on the bidder. See id. If the bidder does not clarify the patent ambiguity, it forfeits the right to rely upon its unilateral interpretation of the solicitation. See Dalton v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 98 F.3d 1298, 1306 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Nothing in the record in this case indicates that plaintiff satisfied its duty of inquiry. Therefore, it may not rely on its unilateral interpretation. (Anderson Columbia Environmental, Inc. v. U.S., No. 98-759C, April 15, 1999) Latvian Connection LLC sought to ask the contracting officer for clarification of the ambiguities and the contracting officer, through their agent appointed by the contracting officer, FEDBID, refused to answer the questions ( Exhibit 2 )

V.

VI. VII.

VIII.

IX.

13.001 Definitions.

As used in this part

I.

Authorized individual means a person who has been granted authority, in accordance with agency procedures, to acquire supplies and services in accordance with this part.

The contracting officer is the authorized individual granted the authority to clarify the ambiguity in the solicitation and that is restated in the FEDBID listing terms by the contracting officer

7|Page
The The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 Contracting Officer (KO) at Mission and Installtion contracting Office, Joint Base Lewis-McChord is the only person authorized to approve changes or modify any of the requirements under this contract, and notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this contract, the said authority remains solely with the KO So here is another ambiguity as to who is authorized to answer questions. The Contracting Officer here clearly states ONLY they have that authority yet, in another part of this confusing solicitation is a delegation to FEDBID Inc to answer questions which they have been unable to answer. SUPPLY AND SMALL SERVIES BRANCH INSTRUCTION 8 - CONTACT INFORMATION Contact ClientServices @ FedBid.com or call 1-877-9FEDBID to address any questions for quotes utilizing FedBid. Contact the specialist listed in the solicitation to address any questions concerning any other request for quotes.

FEDBID Inc., was asked the questions ( Exhibit 2) and they were unable to answer where is the Justification and Approval, the Brand of Line Item 2, or if Brand Name or Equal was ok. They were also unable or unwilling to provide the contracting officers email so that Latvian Connection LLC could write to the contracting officer directly using CERTIFIED email of RPOST. Latvian Connection LLC cannot show the emails to the contracting officer because the contracting officer has refused to give their contact information. II. The MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord is Unreasonable

According to a recent Court of Federal Claims case, The court concludes that the Air Forces apparent attempt to rely on both FAR 6.302-1 and FAR 6.302-2 for the sole-source award to Harris violates FAR 6.302-1(b). Such an approach shows a disregard for the regulatory framework governing sole-source awards, and also demonstrates a disregard for one of the goals of CICA, which is to obtain as much competition as is practicable under the circumstances. The violation of FAR 6.302-1(b) would be less serious if the Air Force had strictly observed the procedural requirements of FAR 6.302-1, and had reasonably ascertained that only Harris could provide CMAS support services. The record shows, however, that neither the letter nor the spirit of FAR 6.302-1 was respected . It is unreasonable that the contracting officer is not named and accessible to answer question and in fact refuses to answer questions. It is unreasonable that the contracting officer has not posted a Justification and Approval for a sole brand just as MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord has done for solicitation UNAWRD-13-Q-5920. (EXHIBIT 4 & 5) It is unreasonable that the contracting officer has cited in the contact point of the solicitation a corporation to answer questions on his/or her behalf. That is a SF1402 holding contracting officers delegated responsibility. It is unreasonable for Latvian Connection LLC to suffer the delays of writing to the contracting officer through FEDBID Inc instead of directly as the Federal Acquisition Regulations allow. By the Contracting Officer stating in the solicitation that the supplies had to be exact without a Justification and Approval or citing the Brand or the FAR Part 6 required authority to solicit only a sole brand while on Line Item 2 leaving off the brand altogether causes an ambiguity and contradiction that needs clarification that ONLY the contracting officer can give. The sole brand only should have been explicit by a posted Justification and Approval just as the very same contracting office at MICC - Joint Base Lewis-McChord did on solicitation UNAWRD-13-Q-5920. (EXHIBIT 4 & 5)

8|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013

The contracting officer has failed to ensure that their contact information is available which is required by FAR Part 12.603 (2), (xvi). And the solicitation fails to give the delivery address, and instead only give a Zip Code. (vii)

Date(s) and place(s) of delivery and acceptance and FOB point.

12.603 Streamlined solicitation for commercial items. (a) When a written solicitation will be issued, the contracting officer may use the following procedure to reduce the time required to solicit and award contracts for the acquisition of commercial items. This procedure combines the synopsis required by 5.203 and the issuance of the solicitation into a single document. (b) When using the combined synopsis/solicitation procedure, the SF 1449 is not used for issuing the solicitation. (c) To use these procedures, the contracting officer shall (1) Prepare the synopsis as described at 5.207. (2) In the Description, include the following additional information: (i) The following statement: This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. (ii) The solicitation number and a statement that the solicitation is issued as an invitation to bid (IFB), request for quotation (RFQ) or request for proposal (RFP). (iii) A statement that the solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular _____. (iv) A notice regarding any set-aside and the associated NAICS code and small business size standard. Also include a statement regarding the Small Business Competitiveness Demonstration Program, if applicable. (v) A list of contract line item number(s) and items, quantities and units of measure, (including option(s), if applicable). (vi) Description of requirements for the items to be acquired. (vii) Date(s) and place(s) of delivery and acceptance and FOB point. The delivery address is missing (viii) A statement that the provision at 52.212-1, Instructions to OfferorsCommercial, applies to this acquisition and a statement regarding any addenda to the provision.

9|Page
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013 (ix) A statement regarding the applicability of the provision at 52.212-2, EvaluationCommercial Items, if used, and the specific evaluation criteria to be included in paragraph (a) of that provision. If this provision is not used, describe the evaluation procedures to be used. (x) A statement advising offerors to include a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and CertificationsCommercial Items, with its offer. (xi) A statement that the clause at 52.212-4, Contract Terms and ConditionsCommercial Items, applies to this acquisition and a statement regarding any addenda to the clause. (xii) A statement that the clause at 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required To Implement Statutes or Executive OrdersCommercial Items, applies to this acquisition and a statement regarding which, if any, of the additional FAR clauses cited in the clause are applicable to the acquisition. (xiii) A statement regarding any additional contract requirement(s) or terms and conditions (such as contract financing arrangements or warranty requirements) determined by the contracting officer to be necessary for this acquisition and consistent with customary commercial practices. (xiv) A statement regarding the Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) and assigned rating, if applicable. (xv) The date, time and place offers are due. (xvi) The name and telephone number of the individual to contact for information regarding the solicitation. The contracting officers name, telephone number and email are missing. FEDBID cannot answer the questions. (3) Allow response time for receipt of offers as follows: (i) Because the synopsis and solicitation are contained in a single document, it is not necessary to publicize a separate synopsis 15 days before the issuance of the solicitation. (ii) When using the combined synopsis and solicitation, contracting officers must establish a response time in accordance with 5.203(b) (but see 5.203(h)). (4) Publicize amendments to solicitations in the same manner as the initial synopsis and solicitation.

III.

Latvian Connection LLC Has Been Prejudiced

Prejudice requires a reasonable likelihood that Latvian Connection LLC would have been awarded the Contract if the solicitation had the contradictions clarified, brands declared, and the information in the Justification and Approval available, then Latvian Connection LLC would be able to make a bid. Such a determination is not susceptible to a precise mathematical calculation; rather, prejudice requires only that but for the agencys actions, the protestors would have had a reasonable chance of receiving the award. Anthem Alliance for Health, Inc., TRICARE Management Activity Reconsideration, B-278189.5, July 13, 1998, 98-2 CPD 66. A reasonable possibility of prejudice therefore is sufficient to sustain the protest. United Intl. Engg., Inc., B-245448.3, Jan 29, 1992, 92-1 C.P.D. 122. Europe Displays, Inc., B-297099.

10 | P a g e
The General Counsel U.S. Government Accountability Office June 29, 2013

REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS Latvian Connection LLC requests that the following materials be included in the agency report, pursuant to 4 C.F.R. 21.1(d)(2008): Signed DD Form 2579, Small Business Coordination Record Bid Abstract and Evaluations All emails, memo for record, regarding the questions posed by bidders to FEDBID.com and this contracting officer. The Justification and Approval The contracting officers name and email address

REQUEST FOR RELIEF AND CONCLUSION Latvian Connection LLC requests that the agency clarify the ambiguities of the solicitation, cite the brand of Line Item 002, and post a Justification and Approval for the sole brand for all 3 line items and extend the solicitation to a reasonable length of time so that an educated bid may be made. We also request that Latvian Connection LLC be reimbursed the costs of filing and pursuing its protest, including reasonable protest preparation fees. Bid Protest Regulations 4 C.F.R. 21.8(d)(1) (2010).

Respectfully submitted,

KEVEN L. BARNES

__________________________ Keven L. Barnes CEO Latvian Connection LLC

Digitally signed by KEVEN L. BARNES DN: cn=KEVEN L. BARNES, o=LATVIAN CONNECTION LLC, ou, email=keven.barnes@latvia nconnectionllc.com, c=US Date: 2013.06.29 21:33:10 +03'00'