Protest Alleging Deficiencies in IFB

Two bidders protested an invitation for bids (IFB) issued for the procurement of mess attendant services at a Naval facility. The first bidder protested the omission of certain data from the IFB and illegible printing on several pages of the IFB. These deficiencies were corrected by amendments to the IFB; consequently, the protest was moot. The second bidder objected to the inspection and acceptance clause of the IFB, alleging that it was an "unlawful provision" imposing a "penalty" for unsatisfactory performance. The second bidder also objected to the time allowed for submission of bids following an IFB amendment which extended the bid opening date 13 days, contending that 13 days were not sufficient to assess the impact of the amendment and two subsequent amendments on its bid price. The disputed clause allowed for deductions from the contractor's payment if sanitary conditions were not corrected within 2 hours of discovery by the Navy, based on the actual costs required to correct sanitary conditions using Naval personnel. The only amendment making any substantive changes in the IFB also extended the bid opening date, therefore, further extensions were unnecessary. The protest was denied.