Skip to Highlights

A firm protested a Navy contract award for fire reporting and protection systems, contending that the Navy improperly permitted the awardee to upwardly adjust its low bid price, since it failed to provide sufficient evidence of its intended bid price and bid error. GAO held that the: (1) awardee failed to explain how it prepared its bid or how the error occurred; (2) worksheets the awardee submitted to support its intended bid price were not in good order; (3) Navy unreasonably determined that there was clear and convincing evidence of the awardee's intended bid price; (4) Navy improperly permitted the awardee to correct its bid price; and (5) Navy improperly made award to the awardee, since there was no evidence that the awardee's bid price would remain low after correction. Accordingly, the protest was sustained and GAO recommended that the Navy: (1) terminate the awardee's contract for convenience and make award to the protester, if it is otherwise eligible; and (2) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.