[Protest of Army Contract Award]
B-213799: Mar 19, 1984
- Full Report:
A firm protested an Army contract award under an invitation for bids for insulating glass windows, contending that the original awardee had withdrawn its bid and that windows it had recently installed violated contract specifications. After noting a disparity between the bid prices and its own estimate, the Army advised bidders that the thickness of the glass was a firm requirement and permitted bidders to withdraw their bids. Award was then made to the protester and another firm. However, the contracting officer subsequently concluded that the bids had been evaluated improperly, and both awards were terminated for the convenience of the Government. The contracting officer stated that the original low bid which had been withdrawn was acceptable and, after reinstatement, an award was made to the low bidder. GAO held that the Army's award to the original low bidder was proper, because the Army had corrected a procurement action based on a mistake that did not exist. GAO found that the allegation that the replacement windows did not meet the contract specifications was a matter of contract administration and did not affect the validity of the award. Accordingly, the protest was denied.