[Protest of Prospective Army Contract Award]
B-211216: Apr 5, 1983
- Full Report:
A firm protested a prospective Army contract award under an invitation for bids for aircraft maintenance and support services. The protester contended that the proposed awardee's bid was so low that the firm would not be able to perform the requirement and that its own bid should have been evaluated as the second-low rather than the third-low bid. GAO has held that the submission of a bid which a competitor considers too low does not constitute a legal basis for precluding a contract award. The Army's conclusion that a prospective awardee is able to perform at its offered price is a matter of responsibility which is a determination that will not be reviewed by GAO absent a showing of fraud or that definitive responsibility criteria were not applied. Since the protester did not allege fraud or failure to apply a definitive criterion, GAO would not consider the matter. In addition, GAO refused to consider the question of the evaluation of the protester's proposal since a question concerning the relative ranking of bidders that are not being considered for award is academic. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.