that's really the issue along with i think what happened was we had a protest and then there was a settlement of that protest now whether there was an issues with the protest could have been dismissed by the government on on that theory was never reached because middle that industrial door contractor satisfies the door manufacturer experience requirements as set forth in the solicitation yes now return to the solicitation two ninety two is that is that that is that's the portion that that's a portion of the of the proposal i guess there three types of hatred or whether my specific question is what are the door manufacturer experience requirements set forth in the solicitation can you point me specifically  thirty hangars or installations made by their company no specific experience in any specific door set forth that's correct paragraph c the certification that they were designing fabricate ninety percent of the systems ok this is best buy anything so those three paragraphs if those three paragraphs paragraphs comprise the door manufacturer experience middle of that paragraph hanger door contract will not be approved etc etc except the manufacturers of so qualified have been approved in writing as having the required experience in the type and size of doors required for this project and there are three types of door specified and you your client i think concedes that it did not have experience in at d we're talking about you change doors for airplanes so your protest was that the government should not have required experience in or three types of doors the protest was to allow my client to participate in a project that was the project and the only difference in the doors is two types line and then the third the braces on canopy door goes up like that and has a break solved but if your objective in the protest was to have the opportunity to participate in it it then weird where is that addressed in the in the offer to resolve the protest that your client accept choir experience and both times or it was under the restrictive because it required one contractor to furnish all types of dogs either result would allow my client to participate in the project and based on their argument either result may not have been restricted competition now it is but the offer to sell didn't didn't address either of those points the offer to sell what did you offer to settle that sounds based on the experience that was submitted to but we just talked about on page pendants page two ninety two but that doesn't address whether that's not a not a concession that just retorts disqualified to bit well if stipulate all you want to that but the fact remains that your client didn't have that experience i think where so it didn't mean that i disagree and and the reason i disagree is that war and i understand why you would want to read it that way and i'm not disagreeing that you couldn't read it that way but the problem at hand is that there's another way you can read this which is also reasonable and that makes his offer and biggest such of the well i don't think with all due respect i don't think that is a reasonable way to read it given the fact that it doesn't limit itself in any particular type this point and says in the next sentence this determination is made pursuant to the modifications issued contemporaneously with the filing this protest groups a reduction of the time period for all of that right but it wasn't the removal of the requirement that one manufacturer furnished all three doors so in order for this determination that industrial door contractor satisfies the manufacturer's moments the only thing it can mean is that based on their experience with the other two types of sliding doors they are deemed to be qualified to provide all the modifications that were issued on july think it was july twenty sixth of two thousand they reduced the number of years in the number of doors but it didn't alter the requirement that one manufacturer furnished all three doors it didn't address that  thought that's what you just but it didn't rest there you know the modification did not address that more than what we're which the change in terms of one manufacturer not having to produce all three doors there wasn't a big in terms of letter the industrial satisfied the door manufacture experience requirements that that's that sentence means that the determination was that industrial door this qualifies about all three types of doors and that's locked in by the next and experience qualifications were they satisfied to modify requirements that a proposed contractor have fifteen years of experience manufacturing those two types of doors a interpret this was being limited only to the experience level of two of the three doors when the whole point of this was to settle a protest about being able to  was clearly there was a bitter had to qualify in some respects with respect to all three doors and the protest was that that was on duly restrictive that was an imposition that was inappropriate and this was a resolution of that protest to give them the opportunity to bid it doesn't spell it out but why would anybody ever sign or agree to something like this if that's if that was not the case well the letter gave industrial dora the opportunity to that and that that is what it is and it did it a big meeting gave them the opportunity to submit a bid that would be rejected industrial doors protest letter to d l dated july twenty sixth if protest the requirement that the same manufacturer submit or make all three types of story the purported offer of august tenth it doesn't excuse the solicitation requirement that they must make all three types of doors and it doesn't address that and therefore the aphorism big deal what does it mean about the breakdown can be dissected open it's left hanging the smithsonian does not address that in the letter is august tenth letter it's confusing what exactly does it mean down the road in an industrial door state you know the confusion i liked again because their submission and it was rigid the submissions were rejected because the same manufacturer i industrial door had to make all three types of doors and that brings home the fact that the offer was confusing it was it didn't address something that was critical to accepting all three types of doors not just two and leaving one up and leaving went out but they also had to be made by the stand manufacturer so it cannot be divided out and that's why the  doors is too high but that's too restrictive of competition it also said we also don't think we should have to make all three types of tumors the two murder spying and the raced on campus because they hadn't made a priest on camera canopy door to know your honor doesn't with all due respect it doesn't address that issue at all and also to waive a contract requirement that country practice or would have had to have deleted that requirement in the solicitation in any resulting contract there's no we don't need the the administrator all act of amending the contract when we got this document in front of us that and the court did that but that doesn't in effect model just the contract modifies the contract  asa says based upon the information supplied in other words looking at the experience requirements for two types of doors it's if anything acknowledging just those two types of doors it's not mentioning a third not if you can do  a finding by the trial court and i don't believe it's relevant to the issue which is the august tenth letter didn't address the lack of experience for that type of store in order to address their contention that they shouldn't even have to either by the os or for the august tenth letter this is likely and then in their submission later on today again they don't provide any of their own experience for that dorg also the experience requirements are to be distinguished from technical requirements their submissions for the other doors were rejected because of technical requirements having not having been met so experience requirements simply having made the doors in the past is different from meeting the technical requirements dimensions of each store and the submissions were rejected for about one technical problems with at least two types of doors third the fact that they didn't submit their own data befor