Skip to main content

B-210823, JUN 28, 1983

B-210823 Jun 28, 1983
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DIGEST: REJECTION OF A LOW BID AS NONRESPONSIVE IS PROPER WHERE DESCRIPTIVE DATA REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE BID FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES DOES NOT DEMONSTRATE THE BIDDER'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS. PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS WERE ADVISED THAT THE DATA SHOULD CLEARLY INDICATE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MATERIAL OFFERED. THE BIDDERS WERE SPECIFICALLY ADVISED THAT THIS DATA WAS TO BE FURNISHED FOR BID EVALUATION. TWO OF THE REASONS ARE THAT THE 1-CUBIC FOOT STORAGE HOPPER AND A 19.5-INCH DIAMETER WHEEL WITH A 2. 720-RPM SPEED ON A 30- HORSEPOWER MOTOR PROPOSED BY ZERO ARE NOT ADEQUATE SINCE EACH WILL NOT ALLOW THE MACHINE TO MEET THE 48. WHERE THE DATA IS USED FOR BID EVALUATION. IS A MATTER OF RESPONSIVENESS AND WHERE SUCH DATA INDICATES A DEVIATION FROM THE SPECIFICATIONS.

View Decision

B-210823, JUN 28, 1983

DIGEST: REJECTION OF A LOW BID AS NONRESPONSIVE IS PROPER WHERE DESCRIPTIVE DATA REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE BID FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES DOES NOT DEMONSTRATE THE BIDDER'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS.

ZERO MANUFACTURING CO.:

ZERO MANUFACTURING CO. (ZERO) PROTESTS THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY'S (ARMY) REJECTION OF ITS LOW BID AS NONRESPONSIVE UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS (IFB) NO. DAAG47-82-B-0139 FOR TWO ABRASIVE BLAST CLEANING MACHINES.

THE IFB REQUIRED THE SUBMISSION OF DESCRIPTIVE DATA WITH THE BID TO SHOW THAT THE PRODUCT OFFERED CONFORMED TO THE SPECIFICATIONS. PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS WERE ADVISED THAT THE DATA SHOULD CLEARLY INDICATE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MATERIAL OFFERED. MOREOVER, THE BIDDERS WERE SPECIFICALLY ADVISED THAT THIS DATA WAS TO BE FURNISHED FOR BID EVALUATION. ZERO'S BID CONTAINED SOME DRAWINGS ILLUSTRATING THE BASIC ITEMS OF PROPOSED EQUIPMENT, AN ARRANGEMENT DRAWING, A BROCHURE CONCERNING AIRLESS EQUIPMENT AND LITERATURE ENTITLED "MACHINE SPECIFICATIONS FOR BLAST CLEANING MACHINE SELF-CONTAINED TUMBLE TYPE WITH LOADER AND DUST COLLECTOR."

THE ARMY REJECTED ZERO'S BID FOR VARIOUS REASONS RELATING TO INADEQUATE DESCRIPTIVE DATA. TWO OF THE REASONS ARE THAT THE 1-CUBIC FOOT STORAGE HOPPER AND A 19.5-INCH DIAMETER WHEEL WITH A 2,720-RPM SPEED ON A 30- HORSEPOWER MOTOR PROPOSED BY ZERO ARE NOT ADEQUATE SINCE EACH WILL NOT ALLOW THE MACHINE TO MEET THE 48,000 POUNDS OF METALLIC ABRASIVE PER HOUR SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENT.

OUR OFFICE HAS HELD THAT THE SUBMISSION OF DESCRIPTIVE DATA, WHERE THE DATA IS USED FOR BID EVALUATION, IS A MATTER OF RESPONSIVENESS AND WHERE SUCH DATA INDICATES A DEVIATION FROM THE SPECIFICATIONS, REJECTION OF THE BID IS REQUIRED. SPRAGUE & HENWOOD, INC., B-201028, APRIL 6, 1981, 81-1 CPD 260. THEREFORE, A BID MUST BE REJECTED IF THE DATA SUBMITTED WITH THE BID DOES NOT CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE PRODUCT OFFERED COMPLIES WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS.

WE AGREE WITH THE ARMY THAT ZERO'S BID DID NOT INCLUDE SUFFICIENT DATA TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PRODUCT OFFERED WOULD COMPLY WITH THE 48,000 POUNDS PER HOUR PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION. WHILE ZERO HAS PRESENTED INFORMATION TO SUPPORT ITS POSITION THAT ITS MACHINE MEETS THE IFB REQUIREMENT, THIS INFORMATION WAS NOT INCLUDED IN ITS BID. DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE THAT WOULD PROVIDE THIS TYPE OF EXPLANATION IS WHAT ZERO SHOULD HAVE SUBMITTED WITH ITS BID SINCE THE BURDEN IS ON EACH BIDDER TO MAKE ITS BID AND LITERATURE, IF REQUIRED, CONFORM TO THE IFB REQUIREMENTS. THEREFORE, WE FIND THAT THE ARMY PROPERLY REJECTED ZERO'S BID.

ZERO'S PROTEST IS DENIED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs