Skip to main content

B-198230, DEC 15, 1980

B-198230 Dec 15, 1980
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DIGEST: PRIOR DECISION WILL NOT BE RECONSIDERED BECAUSE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION DOES NOT SPECIFY FACTUAL OR LEGAL GROUNDS WHICH WOULD REQUIRE MODIFICATION OR REVERSAL OF DECISION. WHICH WAS THAT OTHER BIDDERS MIGHT MISINTERPRET THE SPECIFICATIONS (ZINGER APPARENTLY UNDERSTOOD THE SPECIFICATIONS) AND AS A RESULT MIGHT SUBMIT LOWER BID PRICES PREJUDICIAL TO ZINGER. WAS MERE SPECULATION. THAT THE THREE LOWEST BIDS WERE IN LINE WITH THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE. ZINGER REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION ON THE BASIS THAT WE NEVER RULED ON WHETHER THE ALLEGED AMBIGUITIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTING AGENCY PRIOR TO BID OPENING. REQUESTS FOR RECONSIDERATION MUST CONTAIN A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS UPON WHICH REVERSAL OR MODIFICATION OF THE DECISION IS DEEMED WARRANTED.

View Decision

B-198230, DEC 15, 1980

DIGEST: PRIOR DECISION WILL NOT BE RECONSIDERED BECAUSE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION DOES NOT SPECIFY FACTUAL OR LEGAL GROUNDS WHICH WOULD REQUIRE MODIFICATION OR REVERSAL OF DECISION.

ZINGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. - RECONSIDERATION:

IN OUR DECISION IN ZINGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., B-198230, JULY 23, 1980, 80-2 CPD 64, WE DENIED THE ZINGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., PROTEST AGAINST THE CONTRACTING AGENCY'S FAILURE TO CLARIFY ALLEGEDLY AMBIGUOUS PORTIONS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS IN A PROCUREMENT FOR REHABILITATION WORK. WE HELD THAT ZINGER'S CONCERN, WHICH WAS THAT OTHER BIDDERS MIGHT MISINTERPRET THE SPECIFICATIONS (ZINGER APPARENTLY UNDERSTOOD THE SPECIFICATIONS) AND AS A RESULT MIGHT SUBMIT LOWER BID PRICES PREJUDICIAL TO ZINGER, WAS MERE SPECULATION. WE NOTED THAT ZINGER DID NOT SHOW HOW THE ALLEGED AMBIGUITIES WOULD CAUSE LOWER PRICES SUBMISSIONS, THAT MISINTERPRETATION OF ONE OF THE TWO ALLEGED AMBIGUITIES WOULD RESULT IN HIGHER RATHER THAN LOWER PRICES, AND THAT THE THREE LOWEST BIDS WERE IN LINE WITH THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE.

ZINGER REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION ON THE BASIS THAT WE NEVER RULED ON WHETHER THE ALLEGED AMBIGUITIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTING AGENCY PRIOR TO BID OPENING.

REQUESTS FOR RECONSIDERATION MUST CONTAIN A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS UPON WHICH REVERSAL OR MODIFICATION OF THE DECISION IS DEEMED WARRANTED, SPECIFYING ANY ERRORS OF LAW MADE OR INFORMATION NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 20.9(A) (1980). SINCE ZINGER HAS NOT ADVANCED ANY ADDITIONAL FACTS OR LEGAL ARGUMENTS WHICH SHOW THAT OUR EARLIER DECISION WAS ERRONEOUS, WE MUST DECLINE TO RECONSIDER OUR DECISION. DATA PATHING INC. - RECONSIDERATION, B-188234, JULY 11, 1977, 77-2 CPD 14.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs