[Protests of Army Contract Awards for Construction]
B-246034,B-246036,B-246037,B-246037.2,B-246038,B-246039,B-246040: Feb 14, 1992
- Full Report:
A firm and an individual protested several Army contract awards for construction, contending that the Army arbitrarily imposed suspensions that resulted in the rejection of their low bids. GAO held that: (1) the Army reasonably suspended the individual based on evidence it had of the individual's involvement with a suspended firm; (2) the Army complied with suspension notification requirements, afforded the individual his due process rights to respond, and had no legal requirement to notify the individual that it was considering suspension; (3) the Army's failure to provide notice of suspension to the firm associated with the suspended individual did not deprive the firm of its due process rights, since the firm was owned and controlled by the suspended individual, who had received notice; and (4) although the Army subsequently terminated the suspensions on appeal, the protesters were not eligible bidders at the time of award. Accordingly, the protests were denied.