A firm requested reconsideration of a prior decision in which GAO held that the Army properly canceled an invitation for bids (IFB) based upon its determination that the IFB specifications were ambiguous, inadequate, and materially defective in stating the Government's actual requirements. The protester argued that: (1) it was the low responsive, responsible bidder under the IFB and that it should have received the award; and (2) the defects in the IFB which were cited by the Army as the reason for cancellation are not corrected in the new solicitation, so there was no need to cancel the first IFB. The protester's argument that it submitted the low bid under the IFB was irrelevant to any reconsideration of the propriety of canceling the IFB since the Army made no determinations regarding the acceptability of bids before the IFB was canceled. There was no merit in the protester's contention that the defects are not corrected in the resolicitation; GAO found that the Army had significantly revised its specifications. Accordingly, the prior decision was affirmed. The protester also requested a conference prior to GAO reconsideration of this matter. However, such a request is denied where, as here, the matter can be promptly resolved without a conference.
Skip to Highlights