B-170680, OCT. 27, 1970

B-170680, OCT. 27, 1970

BID PROTEST - DEVIATIONS REAFFIRMING DECISION OF OCT. 6, 1970, DENYING PROTEST AGAINST REJECTION OF BID ON THE BASIS OF SAVINGS THAT WOULD ACCRUE TO THE GOVERNMENT. A BID, THAT ON ITS FACE DID NOT MAKE APPARENT SAVINGS THE GOVERNMENT WOULD REALIZE, WAS PROPERLY REJECTED. ATTEMPTS TO HAVE THE BID CONSIDERED ON THAT BASIS CAN ONLY BE VIEWED AS AN ATTEMPT TO MODIFY THE BID AFTER BID OPENING WHICH WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES.

TO WILLIAM WAHL CORPORATION, PYRODYNE DIVISION:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM OF OCTOBER 15, 1970, REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION B-170680 OF OCTOBER 6, 1970, WHEREIN WE HELD THAT THE BID SUBMITTED BY YOUR COMPANY UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS N00024-70-B-7575 SHOULD BE REJECTED FOR FAILING TO PROVIDE A PRICE FOR OPTION ITEM 3.

YOU POINT OUT THAT WHILE THE DECISION STATES THAT ONE BIDDER BID $45,239 FOR FURNISHING THE ITEM, THE DECISION FAILED TO MENTION THAT ANOTHER OF THE THREE BIDDERS PLACED A NO-COST VALUE ON THE ITEM. IN THIS REGARD, OUR DECISION STATED IN THE FIRST FULL PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 3 THAT "ONE BIDDER OFFERED TO FURNISH ITEM 3 AT NO COST." THUS, IT WAS RECOGNIZED THAT ANOTHER BIDDER HAD BID ON A NO-COST BASIS FOR THE ITEM, BUT IN VIEW OF THE SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT BID BY ANOTHER BIDDER, WE COULD NOT CONCLUDE THAT THE ITEM WAS INSIGNIFICANT AS TO COST.

ALTHOUGH YOU STATE THAT YOU HAD INCLUDED THE COST FOR ITEM 3 IN ITEM 1, SUCH FACT WAS NOT APPARENT ON THE FACE OF YOUR BID. WHILE YOU MAY HAVE SO INTENDED, SUCH INTENTION CAN BE ASCERTAINED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION FURNISHED WITH THE BID AND NOT ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENTS MADE AFTER BIDS WERE OPENED. THUS, WHATEVER YOUR INTENTION MAY HAVE BEEN WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 3, IT WAS NOT EXPRESSED IN THE BID AND, AS INDICATED IN THE DECISION, THE FAILURE TO PRICE ITEM 3 WAS A MATERIAL OMISSION IN THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS DEPRIVED OF A VALUABLE RIGHT TO PURCHASE ITEM 3 AT PRICE OFFERED BY THE BIDDER AND ACCEPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

FURTHER, SINCE YOUR INTENTION TO INCLUDE THE COST OF ITEM 3 IN ITEM 1 IS NOT APPARENT FROM THE BID, YOUR ATTEMPT TO HAVE IT CONSIDERED ON THAT BASIS AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS CAN ONLY BE VIEWED AS AN ATTEMPT TO MODIFY THE BID AFTER BID OPENING. IT IS NECESSARY TO THE PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE BIDDING SYSTEM THAT BIDS BE CONSIDERED ON THE BASIS SUBMITTED WITHOUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVISE OR REBID AFTER BIDS ARE PUBLICLY DISCLOSED.

YOU INDICATE THAT THE GOVERNMENT WOULD STAND TO SAVE SOME $40,000 BY AN AWARD TO YOUR COMPANY. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE STRICT MAINTENANCE OF THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES IS INFINITELY MORE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST THAN OBTAINING A PECUNIARY ADVANTAGE BY VIOLATION OF THE RULES. 17 COMP. GEN. 554, 558-559 (1938).

ACCORDINGLY, THE DECISION OF OCTOBER 6, 1970, IS SUSTAINED.