Skip to Highlights

A firm protested the Navy's rejection of its bid as technically unacceptable, contending that: (1) its alternate product met the Navy's needs; (2) the Navy should have requested best and final offers; and (3) the awardee's product did not comply with solicitation specifications. GAO held that the Navy properly rejected the protester's bid, since the: (1) protester took exception to specific requirements in its revised proposal; (2) awardee offered the brand-name product the solicitation required; and (3) protester untimely protested against alleged solicitation improprieties after bid opening. GAO also held that the Navy: (1) was not required to give the protester an opportunity to correct proposal deficiencies; and (2) properly waived the awardee's minor deviation from solicitation specifications as immaterial.

Full Report