A firm protested the Navy's rejection of its low bid as nonresponsive to a brand name or equal solicitation. The Navy rejected the bid after determining that descriptive material submitted with the bid showed that certain salient solicitation specifications would not be met. The protester contended that its bid was responsive and, as low bidder, it was entitled to award; however, it admitted that its proposal was not responsive to one requirement which it felt was trivial and another requirement which it would provide at no additional charge. GAO has held that bids offering equal products must conform to the salient characteristics of the brand name equipment listed in the solicitation in order to be regarded as responsive; therefore, it found that the Navy's rejection of the bid was proper. Accordingly, the protest was denied.
Skip to Highlights