https://www.gao.gov/products/121642

B-210499: Jun 13, 1983

A firm protested a Navy contract award under an invitation for bids (IFB) for micrographic services. The Navy amended the IFB because the evaluation criteria were ambiguous; however, the protester failed to acknowledge the amendment because it did not receive it. The protester stated that the original evaluation criteria were not ambiguous and that it was the low bidder under the original solicita...

https://www.gao.gov/products/480866

B-210499: Jun 13, 1983

WAS AMBIGUOUS. IS TIMELY SINCE THE PROTESTER WAS UNAWARE OF THE AMENDMENT AND. THE NAVY ISSUED AMENDMENT NO. 1 AFTER A PROSPECTIVE BIDDER ALLEGED THAT THE IFB'S EVALUATION CRITERIA WERE AMBIGUOUS. MATCO WAS THE LOW BIDDER UNDER THIS EVALUATION SCHEME. MICROTECH'S POSITION IS THAT THE IFB'S EVALUATION FACTORS WERE NOT AMBIGUOUS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NO. 1. MICROTECH WOULD BE THE LOW BI...