B-215291, JUN 19, 1984
Highlights
ALLEGES THAT THE TWO LOWER BIDDERS' PRICES ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE COST OF DOING THE WORK AND. THE SUBMISSION OF A BELOW-COST BID IS NOT ILLEGAL AND PROVIDES NO BASIS FOR CHALLENGING THE AWARD OF A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT TO A RESPONSIBLE PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTOR. WHETHER THE LOW BIDDER CAN PERFORM THE CONTRACT AT THE PRICE BID IS A MATTER OF RESPONSIBILITY. OUR OFFICE DOES NOT REVIEW PROTESTS CONCERNING AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY ABSENT A SHOWING THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ACTED FRAUDULENTLY OR IN BAD FAITH OR THAT DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA IN THE SOLICITATION HAVE NOT BEEN MET. NEITHER EXCEPTION IS ALLEGED HERE. TECOM'S RELIANCE ON THE ABOVE REGULATION IS MISPLACED SINCE THE REGULATION APPLIES TO UNREASONABLY HIGH BIDS.
B-215291, JUN 19, 1984
DIGEST: NO BASIS EXISTS TO PRECLUDE A CONTRACT AWARD MERELY BECAUSE BIDDERS SUBMITTED BELOW-COST BIDS. A BELOW-COST BID PRESENTS A QUESTION OF THE BIDDER'S RESPONSIBILITY AND GAO DOES NOT REVIEW AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY EXCEPT IN LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES.
TECOM INCORPORATED:
TECOM INCORPORATED (TECOM) PROTESTS THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANY OTHER BIDDER UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS (IFB) NO. F33601-83-B-9172 ISSUED BY THE WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO. TECOM, THE THIRD LOW BIDDER, ALLEGES THAT THE TWO LOWER BIDDERS' PRICES ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE COST OF DOING THE WORK AND, THEREFORE, REFLECTED A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE IFB REQUIREMENTS; CONSEQUENTLY, THE BIDS SHOULD BE REJECTED AS UNREASONABLY PRICED UNDER DEFENSE ACQUISITION REGULATION SEC. 2-404,2(E), REPRINTED IN 32 C.F.R. PTS. 1 39 (1983).
WE DISMISS THE PROTEST.
THE SUBMISSION OF A BELOW-COST BID IS NOT ILLEGAL AND PROVIDES NO BASIS FOR CHALLENGING THE AWARD OF A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT TO A RESPONSIBLE PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTOR. WHETHER THE LOW BIDDER CAN PERFORM THE CONTRACT AT THE PRICE BID IS A MATTER OF RESPONSIBILITY. OUR OFFICE DOES NOT REVIEW PROTESTS CONCERNING AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY ABSENT A SHOWING THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ACTED FRAUDULENTLY OR IN BAD FAITH OR THAT DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA IN THE SOLICITATION HAVE NOT BEEN MET. SUN TEMPORARY SERVICES, INC., B-210577, FEBRUARY 17, 1983, 83-1 CPD 167. NEITHER EXCEPTION IS ALLEGED HERE. FINALLY, TECOM'S RELIANCE ON THE ABOVE REGULATION IS MISPLACED SINCE THE REGULATION APPLIES TO UNREASONABLY HIGH BIDS. SEE OLD DOMINION SYSTEMS, INC., B-200263, OCTOBER 21, 1980, 80-2 CPD 306.