stated in the invitation for bids. It relies on the following statutory language: Bids shall be evaluated based on the requirements set forth in the invitation for bids, which requirements may include criteria to determine acceptability such as inspection, testing, quality, workmanship, delivery and suitability for a particular purpose. Those criteria such as discounts, transportation costs and total or life-cycle costs that will affect the bid price shall be objectively measurable, which shall be defined by regulation. The invitation for bids shall set forth the evaluation criteria to be used. No criteria may be used in bid evaluation that are not set forth in the invitation for bids. Section 13-1-105. It further relies on Planning & Design Solutions, 118 N.M. at 712, 885 P.2d at 633 (<HOLDING>). {26} However, the statutory requirement that
holding that the definition of procurement under the tucker act is broader than the definition of procurement contract in the fgcaa such that an agency can engage in a procurement process for the purposes of the tucker act even though it is using a cooperative agreement instead of a procurement contract to memorialize the parties agreement holding that without a valid reason for cancelling the procurement  the government violated its duty to conduct a fair procurement holding that the challenge to the sign code is moot because the original code was repealed and superseded and there was no reasonable likelihood the city would reenact the old code holding that citys enforcement of the entire state penal code would not constitute a city policy because the city was required to follow state law holding city violated procurement code by improperly adding to evaluation criteria after receiving bids the factor that local firms would be favored