A firm requested reconsideration of a decision which denied its protest of an invitation for bids (IFB) which was issued by the Army as a small business set-aside. The protester contended that the IFB should be canceled and the requirement resolicited because it failed to receive a copy of the solicitation prior to bid opening. GAO found that the agency made a timely effort to send the protester a copy of the bid package and that the protester contributed to its inability to compete by waiting until the Friday before a Monday bid opening to contact the agency concerning its failure to receive a bid package. GAO determined that the competition was adequate because 84 bid packages were issued and 8 bids were received. Although the protester argued that GAO misconstrued the law and regulation, GAO ruled that the protester failed to demonstrate that the decision contained any error in fact or law. Although the statute and regulation require that an agency provide a copy of a bid package to a small business upon its request, GAO determined that the statute does not require that the law be applied without consideration of the agency's conduct or the impact on the particular procurement. Accordingly, the the prior decision was affirmed.
Skip to Highlights