[Protest of Army Contract Award for Spray Paint Booth]
B-237402: Nov 2, 1989
- Full Report:
A firm protested an Army contract award for a spray paint booth, contending that the: (1) awardee was not a real manufacturer, since it subcontracted all of its fabrications; (2) Army should not have rejected its bid because of a bid error, since the bid was low and it meant to specify another model listed on the same page in its descriptive literature; and (3) Army did not timely inform it of the award. GAO held that: (1) it would not review the legal status of a firm as a regular dealer or manufacturer; (2) the Army properly rejected the protester's bid as nonresponsive, since it did not conform to the solicitation's material requirements; and (3) the protester was not prejudiced by the Army's delay in award notification, since the Army properly rejected its bid as nonresponsive. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.