[Protest of Army Contract Award for Alarm System]
B-241402,B-241402.3: Feb 6, 1991
- Full Report:
A firm protested an Army contract award for alarm systems, contending that the: (1) Army improperly allowed the awardee to upwardly correct its bid; (2) awardee's bid was nonresponsive; (3) awardee failed to submit copies of its product's specifications and catalogue descriptions; (4) awardee failed to adequately document its past performance; and (5) awardee had an unfair competitive advantage as a manufacturer of the required equipment. GAO held that the: (1) awardee submitted sufficient evidence to demonstrate its mistake and the intended bid; (2) awardee took no exceptions to the material requirements; (3) solicitation did not require copies of the specifications or catalogue descriptions; (4) Army reasonably concluded that the awardee adequately documented its past performance; and (5) awardee's status as a manufacturer was not an objectionable competitive advantage. Accordingly, the protest was denied.