B-144111, NOV. 7, 1960
Highlights
WE ARE ENCLOSING A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY REGARDING THIS MATTER. YOU WILL NOTE THAT OUR DECISION AGREES WITH YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOUR BID SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REJECTED FOR FAILURE TO INCLUDE THE SPECIAL CONDITION IN THE BID BOND. ITEM 2 WAS PROPERLY AWARDED TO ALEXANDRIA JUNK COMPANY. THE CONTRACT WAS ENTERED INTO IN GOOD FAITH BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AND THE ALEXANDRIA JUNK COMPANY. THAT YOUR PROTEST IS CONCERNED PRIMARILY WITH THE PRINCIPLE INVOLVED IN THE REJECTION OF YOUR BID.
B-144111, NOV. 7, 1960
TO HYMAN VIENER AND SONS:
YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 24, 1960, PROTESTS REJECTION OF THE BID YOU SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 11, DATED MAY 25, 1960, FOR THE REASON THAT YOUR BID BOND DID NOT CONFORM TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF THE INVITATION.
THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT HAD PREVIOUSLY FURNISHED DETAILS OF THIS MATTER TO OUR OFFICE AND REQUESTED OUR DECISION REGARDING THEIR AUTHORITY TO SOLICIT NEW BIDS FOR ITEMS 1 AND 4 OF THE INVITATION. WE ARE ENCLOSING A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY REGARDING THIS MATTER.
YOU WILL NOTE THAT OUR DECISION AGREES WITH YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOUR BID SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REJECTED FOR FAILURE TO INCLUDE THE SPECIAL CONDITION IN THE BID BOND, SINCE THE STANDARD CONDITION IN FORM NO. 24 AFFORDS THE GOVERNMENT SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME PROTECTION AS THE SPECIAL CONDITION. OUR DECISION AUTHORIZES THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT TO TAKE STEPS TO REINSTATE THE BIDS FOR ITEMS 1 AND 4, AND TO MAKE AWARDS TO THE HIGHEST RESPONSIVE BIDDERS, PROVIDED THE ORIGINAL BIDDERS AGREE.
ITEM 2 WAS PROPERLY AWARDED TO ALEXANDRIA JUNK COMPANY, INC., AS HIGH BIDDER. WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 3, THE CONTRACT WAS ENTERED INTO IN GOOD FAITH BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AND THE ALEXANDRIA JUNK COMPANY, INC., AND, IN VIEW OF THE SMALL AMOUNT INVOLVED AND THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT HAS ELAPSED SINCE THE CONTRACT PERIOD BEGAN, WE DO NOT FEEL THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT AT THIS TIME TO CANCEL THE AWARD. WE UNDERSTAND ALSO, FROM A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH MR. JOSEPH VIENER, THAT YOUR PROTEST IS CONCERNED PRIMARILY WITH THE PRINCIPLE INVOLVED IN THE REJECTION OF YOUR BID, RATHER THAT THE SPECIFIC AWARD FOR THE SMALL AMOUNT OF SCRAP COVERED BY ITEM 3.