[Complaint Against Indian Housing Authority Contract Award]

A firm complained about a contract awarded by the Hoopa Valley Indian Housing Authority for construction, contending that the authority improperly rejected its bid as nonresponsive and acted in bad faith in awarding the contract. After officials notified the protester that its low bid did not meet required specifications, the protester submitted a new bid offering to use the required materials. However, the bid was rejected. The protester complained that the authority should have waived the deviation as a mere technicality or accepted the post-bid-opening offer and determined the bid to be responsive. It further contended that the authority acted in bad faith by misleading it as to the responsiveness of its bid. GAO stated that bidder responsiveness is determined on the basis of the offer submitted at bid opening. Since the protester's bid did not meet the material requirements of the solicitation, a waiver would have been improper. Further, a nonresponsive bid may not be corrected after bid opening in order to make it responsive. Finally, the protester failed to demonstrate bad faith on the part of agency officials. Accordingly, the complaint was denied.