Skip to main content

B-211679.2, DEC 20, 1983

B-211679.2 Dec 20, 1983
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

A PROTESTER WHO FAILS TO CLEARLY SET FORTH ITS GROUNDS FOR PROTEST ASSUMES THE RISK THAT ITS PROTEST WILL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS INTENDED. 2. PROTEST BY A FIRM THAT WOULD NOT BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF THE PROTEST WERE UPHELD WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BECAUSE THE FIRM IS NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY UNDER GAO BID PROTEST PROCEDURES. ABC CONTENDS THAT THE INDIVIDUAL VERSUS CORPORATE SURETY ISSUE WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION WAS NOT THE PRIMARY MATTER RAISED IN ITS PROTEST. ABC STATES THAT ITS PROTEST WAS PRIMARILY "AGAINST AWARD TO ANY BUT THE LOW OFFER.". ABC ASSERTS THAT THE LOW BIDDER PROVIDED THE SAME BOND GUARANTEE TO THE GOVERNMENT AS THE OTHER BIDDERS AND THEREFORE ITS BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AS BEING MOST BENEFICIAL TO THE GOVERNMENT.

View Decision

B-211679.2, DEC 20, 1983

DIGEST: 1. A PROTESTER WHO FAILS TO CLEARLY SET FORTH ITS GROUNDS FOR PROTEST ASSUMES THE RISK THAT ITS PROTEST WILL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS INTENDED. 2. PROTEST BY A FIRM THAT WOULD NOT BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF THE PROTEST WERE UPHELD WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BECAUSE THE FIRM IS NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY UNDER GAO BID PROTEST PROCEDURES.

ABC FOOD SERVICE, INC. - RECONSIDERATION:

ABC FOOD SERVICE, INC. REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION ABC FOOD SERVICE, INC., B-211679, SEPTEMBER 2, 1983, 83-2 CPD 301, IN WHICH WE DENIED ABC'S PROTEST CONCERNING THE USE OF INDIVIDUAL SURETIES ON A PROCUREMENT FOR FOOD SERVICES ISSUED BY VANDENBURG AIR FORCE BASE. INTERPRETED ABC'S PROTEST AS BEING DIRECTED AGAINST THE USE OF INDIVIDUAL SURETIES.

IN ITS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, ABC CONTENDS THAT THE INDIVIDUAL VERSUS CORPORATE SURETY ISSUE WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION WAS NOT THE PRIMARY MATTER RAISED IN ITS PROTEST. INSTEAD, ABC STATES THAT ITS PROTEST WAS PRIMARILY "AGAINST AWARD TO ANY BUT THE LOW OFFER." ABC ASSERTS THAT THE LOW BIDDER PROVIDED THE SAME BOND GUARANTEE TO THE GOVERNMENT AS THE OTHER BIDDERS AND THEREFORE ITS BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AS BEING MOST BENEFICIAL TO THE GOVERNMENT. (THE LOW BID WAS REJECTED BECAUSE THE CONTRACTING OFFICER BELIEVED THE LOW BIDDER DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE BID GUARANTEE REQUIREMENT.)

WE NOTE THAT THE CONTRACTING AGENCY ALSO INTERPRETED ABC'S PROTEST AS WE DID. IN SUCH A CASE, THE PROTESTER ASSUMES THE RISK THAT ITS PROTEST WILL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS INTENDED. YOUNG PATROL SERVICE - REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, B-204198.2, AUGUST 24, 1982, 82-2 CPD 169.

IN ANY EVENT, SINCE ABC WAS THE SIXTH LOW BIDDER, WE DO NOT VIEW IT AS AN INTERESTED PARTY ENTITLED UNDER OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES TO PROTEST THE AGENCY'S AWARDING A CONTRACT TO OTHER THAN THE LOW BIDDER BECAUSE ABC WOULD NOT BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF ITS PROTEST WERE UPHELD. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.1(A) (1983); PHOTICA, INC., B-211445, JULY 11, 1983, 83-2 CPD 74. THUS, EVEN IF WE HAD INTERPRETED ABC'S SUBMISSION AS RAISING THIS GROUND OF PROTEST, WE WOULD NOT HAVE CONSIDERED IT.

THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DENIED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs