B-173729(2), NOV 3, 1971

B-173729(2): Nov 3, 1971

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S APPARENT POSITION THAT THE BID MISTAKE PROCEDURE CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A BID IS RESPONSIVE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GAO DECISIONS AND APPROPRIATE ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PREVENT THE USE OF THIS PROCEDURE FOR SUCH PURPOSE IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. SECRETARY: ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY. WE NOTE THE APPARENT POSITION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE BID MISTAKE PROCEDURE CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A BID IS RESPONSIVE. THIS POSITION IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECISIONS OF THIS OFFICE AND WE. WE ARE ALSO FORWARDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE PROCURING ACTIVITY. THE ALLEGATION OF THE PROTESTING CONCERN THAT AEL HAS SUBMITTED A BID ON WHICH IT WILL SUSTAIN A LOSS FOR THIS PROCUREMENT.

B-173729(2), NOV 3, 1971

BID PROTEST - BID RESPONSIVENESS ALTHOUGH THE COMP. GEN. DENIED THE PROTEST OF DYNASCIENCES, INC., THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S APPARENT POSITION THAT THE BID MISTAKE PROCEDURE CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A BID IS RESPONSIVE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GAO DECISIONS AND APPROPRIATE ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PREVENT THE USE OF THIS PROCEDURE FOR SUCH PURPOSE IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. FURTHER, "SHORTHAND" AND "INARTISTIC" REFERENCES TO VARIOUS TERMS OF THE IFB IN THE SOLICITATION SHOULD ALSO BE AVOIDED.

TO MR. SECRETARY:

ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY, DENYING THE PROTEST OF DYNASCIENCES, INC., UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. N00126-71-B-0363, ISSUED BY THE NAVY ELECTRONICS SUPPLY OFFICE, GREAT LAKES, ILLINOIS.

ALTHOUGH WE DENIED THE PROTEST BECAUSE WE FOUND AEL'S BID TO BE RESPONSIVE ON ITS FACE, WE NOTE THE APPARENT POSITION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE BID MISTAKE PROCEDURE CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A BID IS RESPONSIVE. THIS POSITION IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECISIONS OF THIS OFFICE AND WE, THEREFORE, RECOMMEND THAT APPROPRIATE ACTION BE TAKEN TO PREVENT USE OF THIS PROCEDURE FOR SUCH PURPOSE IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.

THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ALSO STATES THAT THE SOLICITATION CONTAINED "SHORTHAND" AND "INARTISTIC" REFERENCES TO VARIOUS TERMS OF THE IFB. AGREE WITH THIS JUDGMENT AND RECOMMEND THAT SUCH REFERENCES BE AVOIDED IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.

WE ARE ALSO FORWARDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE PROCURING ACTIVITY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR INFORMAL UNDERSTANDING WITH THE ATTORNEY FOR DYNASCIENCES, THE ALLEGATION OF THE PROTESTING CONCERN THAT AEL HAS SUBMITTED A BID ON WHICH IT WILL SUSTAIN A LOSS FOR THIS PROCUREMENT. THE ACTIVITY SHOULD CONSIDER SUCH ALLEGATION IN DETERMINING WHETHER AEL IS A RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THIS PROCUREMENT. SEE B-173276, AUGUST 19, 1971.

THE PROTEST WAS THE SUBJECT OF A REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 10, 1971, FROM DEPUTY COMMANDER, PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT.

THE FILE FORWARDED WITH THAT REPORT IS RETURNED.