Procurement Procedures Did Not Comply With Provisions of Brooks Bill

B-184770: May 11, 1976

Additional Materials:


Ralph O. White
(202) 512-8278

Kenneth E. Patton
(202) 512-8205


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A company protested a contract award, claiming that it met all qualifications for the job; the awardee did not meet geographic requirements; and its price was below that of the contractor. The award was improper since provisions of the Brooks Bill were not followed. For example: no public announcement was made of the proposed procurement; no preliminary negotiations were conducted with several top contenders; selection criteria were not published; and unannounced criteria were improperly used by the evaluation board. However, termination of the contract was not recommended because the contract was substantially completed.