[Complaint Concerning Handling of Bids by the City of Seattle, WA]

Two firms complained about the handling of bids by a Urban Mass Transportation Administration grantee, arguing that the awardee's bid was nonresponsive because it did not disclose proprietary data contained in the bid. The first protester also argued that: (1) the grantee violated normal bid opening rules; and (2) the grantee improperly permitted the awardee to clarify its bid after bid opening. GAO held that, since the solicitation stated that only prices would be evaluated, proprietary data in the bid did not have to be disclosed. GAO also held that: (1) the complaint about the grantee's bid opening practices was untimely because the matter was not pursued in a reasonable amount of time; and (2) the grantee's request for clarifications of the awardee's bid was not improper because the action was not prejudicial to any other bidders. The second protester's complaint about the awardee's responsibility was not considered since it was not shown that the grantee's affirmative determination of responsibility was arbitrary. Accordingly, the first protester's complaint was dismissed in part and denied in part. The second protester's complaint was denied.