Protest Involving the Cancellation of IFB

A firm protested the cancellation of an invitation for bids (IFB) and the subsequent rejection of its bid under the readvertisement of the procurement. After the opening of bids, the IFB was canceled because it was decided that there were elements of construction in the IFB for which no coverage had been provided. The IFB did not contain minimum wage rates required by labor legislation. The low bidder contended that it was not necessary that the IFB be canceled. However, GAO has held that failure to meet the Davis-Bacon minimum wage provisions in a contract could not be cured retroactively. The low bid submitted under the readvertisement was rejected as nonresponsive because it was not supported by a bid bond. One of the purposes of the bid bond is to insure that the successful bidder will furnish performance and payment bonds required by legislation where the cost of construction exceeds $25,000. A bid price structure which is used to circumvent a statutory requirement renders the bid ineligible for award. The low bidder also made a claim for bid preparation costs and related losses. Since the cancellation of the first solicitation was proper and the rejection of the claimant's bid under the second solicitation was proper, it was unnecessary to consider the claim.