B-177121, OCT 19, 1972

B-177121, OCT 19, 1972

BID PROTEST - FAILURE TO RECEIVE IFB DENIAL OF PROTEST BY PROFESSIONAL PERIODICALS, INC., AGAINST THE AWARD OF ANY CONTRACT UNDER AN IFB ISSUED BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION SUPPLY DEPOT, SOMERVILLE, N. J., FOR THE FURNISHING OF PERIODICAL SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE TO THE VA AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. THE FAILURE OF A BIDDER TO RECEIVE AN IFB DOES NOT ORDINARILY REQUIRE EITHER A RESOLICITATION OF THE BIDS OR CONSIDERATION OF A BID SUBMITTED AFTER BID OPENING. 34 COMP. GEN. 684 (1955). IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT ADEQUATE COMPETITION WITHIN THE MEANING OF FPR 1-2.203-1 WAS OBTAINED SINCE 15 FIRMS WERE SOLICITED AND THE INVITATION WAS SYNOPSIZED IN THE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY. ACCORDINGLY, THE PROTEST MUST BE DENIED.

TO PROFESSIONAL PERIODICALS INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEFAX OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1972, AND LETTER DATED OCTOBER 5, 1972, PROTESTING AGAINST ANY AWARD OF A CONTRACT UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS M-10-1-73, ISSUED BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION SUPPLY DEPOT, SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY.

THE ABOVE INVITATION, ISSUED ON AUGUST 25, 1972, SOLICITED BIDS FOR THE FURNISHING OF PERIODICAL SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE TO THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. BID OPENING WAS SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 22, 1972. ACCORDING TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, THE INVITATION WAS MAILED TO FIFTEEN (15) BIDDERS, INCLUDING YOUR FIRM, AND WAS SYNOPSIZED IN THE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ALSO ADVISED US THAT AN INFORMATION COPY OF THE INVITATION WAS SENT TO THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION'S CENTRAL OFFICE WHERE IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE INVITATION HAD OMITTED CERTAIN CLAUSES. THESE OMISSIONS WERE SUBSEQUENTLY INCORPORATED INTO THE INVITATION BY AN AMENDMENT ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1972. BIDS WERE OPENED AS SCHEDULED ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1972, AND FIVE BIDS WERE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE INVITATION.

IT WAS NOT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 25, 1972, THAT YOU CALLED THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TO ADVISE HIM THAT WHILE YOU HAD RECEIVED THE SEPTEMBER 15 AMENDMENT, YOU HAD NOT RECEIVED THE INVITATION. YOU WERE ADVISED THAT IT WAS TOO LATE FOR YOU TO SUBMIT A BID.

THIS OFFICE HAS CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT THE FAILURE OF A BIDDER TO RECEIVE AN INVITATION FOR BIDS DOES NOT ORDINARILY REQUIRE EITHER A RESOLICITATION OF BIDS OR CONSIDERATION OF A BID SUBMITTED AFTER THE TIME FIXED FOR OPENING OF BIDS. B-169758, JULY 9, 1970; B-175217, APRIL 6, 1972; B- 170052(1), AUGUST 25, 1970; 34 COMP. GEN. 684 (1955). IN THE INSTANT CASE, JUDGING FROM THE NUMBER OF SOURCES SOLICITED AND THE NUMBER OF BIDS RECEIVED, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR SOLICITING A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS, SO AS TO ELICIT ADEQUATE COMPETITION, WAS SATISFIED (SECTION 1-2.203-1, FEDERAL PROCUREMENT REGULATIONS (FPR)). THIS COUPLED WITH THE FACT THAT THE PRESENT PROCUREMENT WAS PUBLICIZED BY A SYNOPSIS IN THE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY, AS REQUIRED BY FPR 1-2.203-4 AND 1-1.1003-2, AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY INTENT TO EXCLUDE YOUR FIRM FROM PARTICIPATION IN THE BIDDING, LEADS US TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE RECORD PRESENTS NO BASIS FOR THIS OFFICE TO OBJECT TO THE AWARDING OF A CONTRACT UNDER THE SUBJECT INVITATION FOR BIDS.

ALTHOUGH IT IS REGRETTABLE THAT YOU DID NOT RECEIVE YOUR COPY OF THE INVITATION, WHICH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN LOST IN THE MAIL, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE IN THE MATTER AND YOUR PROTEST IS THEREFORE DENIED.