[Protest of Army's Alleged Improper Rejection of Bid for Maintenance Services]
Highlights
A firm protested the Army's rejection of its low bids under two solicitations for painting and repair work, contending that the Army: (1) improperly rejected its bid because the individual sureties listed on its bid bonds failed to disclose all of their other outstanding obligations; and (2) unfairly required individual sureties, but not corporate sureties, to list outstanding obligations. GAO held that: (1) the sureties completed affidavits that did not list all of their outstanding obligations; (2) the Army relied on the Treasury's advice regarding acceptable corporate sureties; and (3) it would be unreasonable to expect the Army to track each individual surety's outstanding obligations as part of its preaward survey. Accordingly, the protest was denied.