B-185755: Jun 3, 1977

MERE NEGLIGENCE BY PROCURING ACTIVITY IS NOT GENERALLY SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT CLAIM FOR BID PREPARATION COSTS. EVEN THOUGH A SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE PROVISION WAS INADVERTENTLY INCLUDED IN IFB OF PROTESTER. IS NOT ARBITRARY OR CAPRICIOUS ACTION TO JUSTIFY CLAIM FOR BID PREPARATION COSTS SINCE EVIDENCE INDICATES NO INTENT BY AGENCY TO RESTRICT PROCUREMENT TO SMALL BUSINESS AND NO SET- ASIDE PROVISI...

B-185755: Apr 12, 1976

PROTEST BY SMALL BUSINESS ALLEGING AWARD SHOULD NOT BE MADE TO LOW BIDDER BECAUSE IT IS LARGE BUSINESS BIDDING ON SMALL BUSINESS SET ASIDE PROCUREMENT IS DENIED. SINCE SET-ASIDE DETERMINATION WAS NEVER MADE. THERE WAS ADEQUATE COMPETITION AMONG 16 BIDDERS AND LOW BIDDER IS BELOW GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE. IT WAS DELETED IN IFB RECEIVED BY LARGE BUSINESS BIDDER. 2. SINCE DETERMINATION WAS NEVER MADE TO S...

B-185755: Apr 12, 1976

A joint venture protested an award to the low bidder because it alleged that it was a large business bidding on a small business set-aside. Since a small business set-aside determination was never made and the agency did not intend the solicitation to be restricted to small businesses, the protest was denied. The question of whether a procurement should be set aside is within the province of the p...

B-185755: Jun 3, 1977

Two businesses engaged in a joint venture claimed bid preparation costs for their bid submitted in response to an invitation for bids (IFB) for utilities improvements at a naval submarine base. Mere negligence by the procuring activity is not generally sufficient to support a claim for bid preparation costs. The award to a large business, even though a small business set-aside provision was inadve...