Skip to main content

B-206801, APR 8, 1982

B-206801 Apr 08, 1982
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DIGEST: BIDDER WHO OFFERED A 30-DAY BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD WHEN A 60-DAY ACCEPTANCE PERIOD WAS REQUESTED IN INVITATION FOR BIDS MAY NOT BE PERMITTED TO EXTEND THAT PERIOD IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR AWARD SINCE AN EXTENSION WOULD BE PREJUDICIAL TO OTHER BIDDERS WHO OFFERED THE REQUESTED ACCEPTANCE PERIOD. THE BASIS FOR THE HOLDING WAS THAT AN EXTENSION WOULD BE PREJUDICIAL TO OTHER BIDDERS WHO OFFERED THE REQUESTED ACCEPTANCE PERIOD IN THAT THOSE BIDDERS WHO OFFERED THE REQUESTED ACCEPTANCE PERIOD ASSUMED A GREATER RISK OF PRICE OR MARKET FLUCTUATIONS THAN THE BIDDER WHO DID NOT. WE CONCLUDE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REFUSAL TO CONSIDER AUTO-SKATE'S BID WAS PROPER. SINCE IT IS CLEAR FROM AUTO-SKATE'S INITIAL SUBMISSION TO OUR OFFICE THAT THE PROTEST IS WITHOUT LEGAL MERIT.

View Decision

B-206801, APR 8, 1982

DIGEST: BIDDER WHO OFFERED A 30-DAY BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD WHEN A 60-DAY ACCEPTANCE PERIOD WAS REQUESTED IN INVITATION FOR BIDS MAY NOT BE PERMITTED TO EXTEND THAT PERIOD IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR AWARD SINCE AN EXTENSION WOULD BE PREJUDICIAL TO OTHER BIDDERS WHO OFFERED THE REQUESTED ACCEPTANCE PERIOD.

AUTO-SKATE COMPANY:

AUTO-SKATE COMPANY (AUTO-SKATE) PROTESTS THE REJECTION OF ITS BID UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. DLA400-82-B-1097 ISSUED BY THE DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA).

AUTO-SKATE CONTENDS THAT DLA IMPROPERLY PREVENTED IT FROM EXTENDING ITS BID FROM A 30-DAY BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, WE DENY THE PROTEST SUMMARILY.

AS PERMITTED BY THE IFB, AUTO-SKATE LIMITED THE BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD TO 30 CALENDAR DAYS INSTEAD OF THE STANDARD 60-CALENDAR-DAY PERIOD. PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD, AUTO SKATE SENT A LETTER TO THE PROCURING ACTIVITY OFFERING TO EXTEND THE BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD. THE PROCURING ACTIVITY EXCEEDED THE 30-DAY ACCEPTANCE PERIOD AND REFUSED TO PERMIT AN EXTENSION.

IN RAMAL INDUSTRIES, INC., B-202961, AUGUST 25, 1981, 60 COMP.GEN. , 81-2 CPD 177, AFFIRMED, RAMAL INDUSTRIES, INC. - RECONSIDERATION, B-202961.2, B-202961.3, NOVEMBER 12, 1981, 81-2 CPD 400, WE HELD THAT A BIDDER WHO OFFERED A BID ACCEPTANCE PERIOD SHORTER THAN THAT REQUESTED IN THE IFB COULD NOT EXTEND THAT PERIOD IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR AWARD. THE BASIS FOR THE HOLDING WAS THAT AN EXTENSION WOULD BE PREJUDICIAL TO OTHER BIDDERS WHO OFFERED THE REQUESTED ACCEPTANCE PERIOD IN THAT THOSE BIDDERS WHO OFFERED THE REQUESTED ACCEPTANCE PERIOD ASSUMED A GREATER RISK OF PRICE OR MARKET FLUCTUATIONS THAN THE BIDDER WHO DID NOT. IN VIEW OF OUR HOLDING IN RAMAL, WE CONCLUDE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REFUSAL TO CONSIDER AUTO-SKATE'S BID WAS PROPER. SEE ALSO, INTROL CORPORATION, B-206012, FEBRUARY 24, 1982, 82-1 CPD 164.

SINCE IT IS CLEAR FROM AUTO-SKATE'S INITIAL SUBMISSION TO OUR OFFICE THAT THE PROTEST IS WITHOUT LEGAL MERIT, WE HAVE REACHED THE DECISION WITHOUT REQUIRING A REPORT FROM THE PROCURING ACTIVITY. SEACOAST TRUCKING & MOVING, B-200315, SEPTEMBER 30, 1980, 80-2 CPD 235.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs