BFI Medical Waste Services

B-266354 Jan 29, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Or volume can be determined from the face of the bid or the effect of the deficiency on the price of the bid is clearly de minimis and waiver would not be prejudicial to other bidders. Bids were requested on an "all or none" basis. Bidders were required to enter unit and extended prices for each sub-line item. Although BFI's total price for both CLINs was apparently the lowest received. A bid must represent an unequivocal offer to provide the exact thing called for in the solicitation such that acceptance of the bid will bind the contractor to perform in accordance with all of the solicitation's material terms and conditions. A bid also must be rejected as nonresponsive if it is ambiguous regarding the actual price the government would be obligated to pay upon acceptance of the bid. View Decision Matter of: BFI Medical Waste Services File: B-266354 Date: January 29, 1996 When a bidder does not bid based on the precise quantity, measurement, or volume called for in the invitation for bids, the bid must be rejected as nonresponsive unless the intended price for the proper quantity, measurement, or volume can be determined from the face of the bid or the effect of the deficiency on the price of the bid is clearly de minimis and waiver would not be prejudicial to other bidders. Attorneys DECISION BFI Medical Waste Services protests the rejection of its bid as nonresponsive under invitation for bids (IFB) No. N68925-95-B-A498, issued by the Department of the Navy for medical waste removal and disposal services at various medical facilities within the jurisdiction of the Navy Public Works Center in Washington, D.C. We deny the protest. The IFB contemplated the award of a combination fixed-price/indefinite quantity contract for the pickup and disposal of medical waste and replacement containers at numerous specified medical facilities. Contract line item (CLIN) No. 0001 comprised the fixed-price portion of the contract, and CLIN No. 0002 comprised the indefinite quantity portion of the contract, for scheduled and unscheduled pickup and disposal of medical waste, respectively. Each CLIN consisted of two sub-line items, one for medical waste to be incinerated, and one for medical waste to be sterilized. Bids were requested on an "all or none" basis. Section B of the solicitation contained two pricing schedules, one for each CLIN and its respective sub-line items. For each sub-line item, the schedules listed a maximum quantity of medical waste, using pounds as the unit of measure. In accordance with section B.2, bidders were required to enter unit and extended prices for each sub-line item, as well as a total price for each CLIN and a total price for both CLINs. Section M.2.a. of the IFB informed bidders that the failure to submit a bid for all items and quantities listed would cause rejection of the bid. The Navy received four bids, including one from BFI. The section B pricing schedule in BFI's bid listed a total price for CLIN No. 0001 and a total price for both CLINs in the spaces reserved for such prices. However, the firm did not insert unit or extended pricing for any of the sub-line items or the total price for CLIN No. 0002. Instead, in the spaces reserved for such pricing, BFI had typed "**SEE PRICING SCHEDULE**". A separate pricing schedule, attached to BFI's bid, listed each of the medical facilities covered by the IFB, along with corresponding entries under three columns: rate, number of boxes per year, and extended dollar amount. Although BFI's total price for both CLINs was apparently the lowest received, [1] the Navy rejected the firm's bid as nonresponsive because it did not complete the pricing schedules in section B and the information in its separate pricing schedule did not clearly indicate whether the firm intended to bid for each item, and because BFI's pricing schedule put into question what the firm intended to bid for each item. [2] BFI contends that its pricing schedules contained sufficient information for the Navy to determine that BFI bid on all of the requirements and the prices it intended to bid. To be responsive, a bid must represent an unequivocal offer to provide the exact thing called for in the solicitation such that acceptance of the bid will bind the contractor to perform in accordance with all of the solicitation's material terms and conditions. J.C. Adams, Inc., B-252132, May 18, 1993, 93-1 CPD Para. 394. A bid also must be rejected as nonresponsive if it is ambiguous regarding the actual price the government would be obligated to pay upon acceptance of the bid. Municipal Leasing Sys., Inc., B-242648, B-242648.2, May 21, 1991, 91-1 CPD Para. 495.