From this particular experience, María Eugenia Batista has acquired an excellent knowledge of the problems that affect her clients and a unique approach to meet these needs, which allows her to offer effective and timely solutions. As a result, the firm focuses on providing high-quality legal services aimed at fulfilling the essential aspects that clients value: knowledge and experience in dealing with legal issues, cost control, effective time management and achieving positive results. With the aim of promoting women`s equality in the legal sector, the firm maintains a mentoring program consisting of selecting active women with at least five (5) years of experience in law firms or as in-house legal advisors to offer coaching on how to progress professionally without being biased on how to reconcile the different areas of their personal life with their professional career, without giving up professional practice. Regarding Cape`s remaining challenges in evaluating the SEM proposal, we note that the protester is not an interested party. Under our bid challenge policy, only interested parties can protest procurement actions taken by federal agencies, such as those conducted here by the Corps. 4 C.F.R. § 21.1(a). This means that a demonstrator must be an actual or potential tenderer or tenderer whose direct economic interest would be affected by the award of a contract or by the non-award of a contract. 4 C.F.R. § 21.0(a)(1). A protester is not an interested party if he could not be considered for a reward if his protest were maintained.
JSF Sys., LLC, B-410217, October 30, 2014, 2014 CPD ¶ 328 to 4; Yoosung T&S, Ltd., B-291407, November 15, 2002, 2002 CPD ¶ 204 to 3. Given our findings above, Cape Town is still not eligible for award and therefore does not have the necessary legal interest to challenge the MDBs` assessment of the MDBs` proposal. As a result, this basis was rejected by Cape`s protest. Replacement of fire hydrant fuel system, cleaning and abandonment of existing fuel lines, installation/removal of concrete or asphalt for aerodromes, utilities, hydrant loop piping, installation of fire hydrant pits, electrical system and automatic controls, fuel filter separators, construction and renovation of the pumping station, assembly of the high point vent, low-point drain pit assembly and site improvements, including removal and replacement of pavements, concrete and asphalt, provision of all support facilities (utilities and grounding) for Type III fuel systems or similar facilities as mentioned above. [7] The ECS noted that the four key elements included the characteristics identified in the project characteristics and similar types of areas of experience described as “particularly relevant” according to the previous RFP performance factor. See AR, Tab 16, SSRR, p. 2; DP to 9. We are committed to our employees and all our business partners, we support each other and we strive to maintain a healthy and balanced quality of life.
The call recommended that each bidder be assigned a performance confidence rating after evaluating the supplier`s recent performance in the past, with a focus on performance relevant to the requirements of the contract. Id., p. 8. In this context, the call stated that “certain aspects of relevant projects include similarity in scope, nature of work, complexity, type of contract, and degree of subcontracting or team-building proposed by [o]fferor”. The call also recommended that projects be assessed against a list of “project characteristics” [2], which “should not be an exhaustive list”, and similar types of areas of experience deemed “particularly relevant”. [3] Ibid. As relevant in this case, the call indicated that the Agency would award relevance ratings[4] to projects submitted by bidders “that meet the criteria described in section 4.2.2”. Id., p. 9. In this context, project characteristics (4.2.2.1) and “particularly relevant” experiences (4.2.2.2) have been listed in the subsections of paragraph 4.2.2. Id., pp. 8-9.
The appeal also noted that “[i]f no current or relevant history is available, or if the provider`s track record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence score can reasonably be assigned, this factor will be assigned an `unknown (neutral) confidence` rating. Id. on Cape 11 argues that the Agency`s reassessment in the light of the four key elements, without amending the tender and without giving suppliers the opportunity to revise their proposals, was not compatible with tendering and procurement law; and argues that the re-evaluation was also flawed and uneven. While we do not specifically address all of Cape`s arguments, we have fully considered them all and note that they provide no basis for supporting the protest. Everyone is so positive about the future and passionate about what they have built. The family culture that MEB naturally embodies is unlike anything else in my career.
