[Complaint Against Contract Award for FAA-Funded Project]

A firm complained against an airport commission's contract award under funding from the Federal Aviation Administration for construction of airport runways and taxiways. The protester argued that the awardee did not follow the bid specifications carefully, which resulted in several errors, and that the grantees should have provided formal administrative appeal procedures to challenge bidding procedures or contract awards. GAO found that the first error was not material and, since several other firms responded to the procurement, they were not prejudiced by the error. GAO held that the second error was an irregularity and that the grantee's refusal to reject the bid on that basis was neither unreasonable nor an abuse of discretion. Furthermore, GAO stated that, as in the third error, where there was no doubt as to the intended bid price, a legally binding offer existed under which the offerer would be obligated to perform at the bid price. In addition, GAO did not agree with the protester's interpretation of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102 that grantees should establish formal administrative appeal procedures. GAO found that there was no evidence that the review procedures did not reflect local procurement procedures or that they were in conflict with the circular or applicable Federal law. Finally, GAO stated that, while firms do have the right to have their bids considered fairly, no firm has a property right in a Government contract, and, therefore, the protester was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, the complaint was denied.