B-174660, FEB 7, 1972
Highlights
THE REQUIREMENT IS PROCEDURAL AND PROVIDES NO LEGAL BASIS FOR DISTURBING AN AWARD. TO HY-GAIN ELECTRONICS CORPORATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM DATED DECEMBER 2. THE RFQ WAS ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 10. THE SEVEN PROPOSALS RECEIVED WERE EVALUATED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT ONLY ONE WAS TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE. YOUR PROPOSAL WAS RATED LOWEST. THE SIX UNSUCCESSFUL OFFERORS WERE NOTIFIED BY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 29. THAT "YOUR PROPOSAL IS NOT THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. FURTHER NEGOTIATION WITH YOU IS NOT CONTEMPLATED AND ANY REVISION OF YOUR PROPOSAL WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.". YOU THEN PROTESTED BECAUSE THE CONTRACTING OFFICER FAILED TO ADVISE YOU IN GENERAL TERMS OF THE BASIS FOR HIS DETERMINATION THAT YOUR PROPOSAL WAS UNACCEPTABLE AS REQUIRED BY ASPR 3.508-2.
B-174660, FEB 7, 1972
BID PROTEST - EXPLANATION OF BID REJECTION DECISION DENYING PROTEST OF HY-GAIN ELECTRONICS CORPORATION AGAINST REJECTION OF ITS PROPOSAL UNDER AN RFQ ISSUED BY THE ARMY ELECTRONICS COMMAND, FORT MONMOUTH, N. J. THE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ASPR 3.508-2, WHICH REQUIRE NOTICE OF A GENERAL EXPLANATION OF BID REJECTIONS, HAS BEEN REMEDIED. ANY EVENT, THE REQUIREMENT IS PROCEDURAL AND PROVIDES NO LEGAL BASIS FOR DISTURBING AN AWARD.
TO HY-GAIN ELECTRONICS CORPORATION:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM DATED DECEMBER 2, 1971, IN WHICH YOU PROTEST AN AWARD UNDER REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS (RFQ) NO. DAAB07-72-O 0039, ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES ARMY ELECTRONICS COMMAND, FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY.
THE RFQ WAS ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 10, 1971, FOR CERTAIN VHF ANTENNAE AND CARRYING BAGS. THE SEVEN PROPOSALS RECEIVED WERE EVALUATED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT ONLY ONE WAS TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE. YOUR PROPOSAL WAS RATED LOWEST. THE SIX UNSUCCESSFUL OFFERORS WERE NOTIFIED BY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 29, 1971, THAT "YOUR PROPOSAL IS NOT THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. THEREFORE, FURTHER NEGOTIATION WITH YOU IS NOT CONTEMPLATED AND ANY REVISION OF YOUR PROPOSAL WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED." YOU THEN PROTESTED BECAUSE THE CONTRACTING OFFICER FAILED TO ADVISE YOU IN GENERAL TERMS OF THE BASIS FOR HIS DETERMINATION THAT YOUR PROPOSAL WAS UNACCEPTABLE AS REQUIRED BY ASPR 3.508-2. NO AWARD HAS BEEN MADE PENDING RESOLUTION OF THIS PROTEST.
WE AGREE WITH YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE PROVISIONS OF ASPR 3.508-2 WERE NOT COMPLIED WITH. THAT SECTION CLEARLY REQUIRES A PRE-AWARD NOTICE ADVISING AN OFFEROR THAT HIS OFFER IS UNACCEPTABLE, AND INDICATING IN GENERAL TERMS THE BASIS FOR SUCH DETERMINATION. HOWEVER, THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU WERE INFORMED BY LETTER DATED DECEMBER 8, 1971, OF SOME OF THE DEFICIENCIES IN YOUR PROPOSAL AND THAT THE FAILURE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH PROPER NOTIFICATION HAS NOW BEEN REMEDIED. WHILE IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT YOU WERE NOT ORIGINALLY PROVIDED WITH THE NOTIFICATION CONTEMPLATED BY THE REGULATION, THIS REQUIREMENT IS PROCEDURAL IN NATURE AND A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH IT PROVIDES NO LEGAL BASIS FOR DISTURBING AN AWARD. 168190(1), FEBRUARY 24, 1970.
THEREFORE, YOUR PROTEST MUST BE DENIED.