Beta Construction Company

Case: B-274511 Agency: Protester: Beta Construction Company Date: 1996-12-13 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-274511 Dec 13, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights A firm protested a General Services Administration (GSA) contract award for roof replacement and related work, contending the GSA: (1) should have rejected the awardee's bid as nonresponsive, since it did not contain certain requested information at bid opening; and (2) improperly allowed the awardee an opportunity to elect after bid opening whether or not to accept the contract by choosing to furnish or not furnish the requested information. GAO held that the: (1) lack of the information in question was not a matter of bidder responsiveness, since it related to the bidders' warranty, experience, and qualification requirements; and (2) possibility that the awardee could have rendered itself ineligible for award by refusing to supply the requested information did not convert this matter of responsibility into an issue of responsiveness requiring the rejection of the awardee's bid. Accordingly, the protest was denied. View Decision Matter of: Beta Construction Company File: B-274511 Date: December 13, 1996 Awardee's failure to submit with bid information requested by invitation for bids does not require rejection of bid where requested information related to the experience and qualifications of the bidder and roofing materials manufacturer and therefore could be submitted after bid opening since it involved a matter of bidder responsibility rather than bid responsiveness. Attorneys DECISION Beta Construction Company protests the award of a contract to National Roofing Company under invitation for bids (IFB) No. GS-03P-96-CDC-0017, issued by the General Services Administration for replacing a roof and related work on the Social Security Administration's National Computer Center. Beta argues that the bid submitted by National was nonresponsive and should have been rejected. We deny the protest. Ten bids were submitted in response to the IFB. The low bid was rejected. National's bid was the next low. Although National had failed to submit certain information with its bid, when requested to do so after bid opening, the firm submitted that information. The contracting officer concluded that the information related to the firm's qualifications and experience--matters of responsibility--and determined National to be responsible. Beta argues that National's bid should have been rejected as nonresponsive because it was not accompanied by information concerning the type of roof to be supplied, the manufacturer of the roof and warranties. Beta argues that the information related to responsiveness because the IFB required the information to be submitted with the bid and because without that information the agency could not determine from the bid whether National had offered to meet the requirements of the solicitation. In general, solicitation requirements for information relating to a bidder's capability and experience pertain to the bidder's responsibility, while those concerned with the product to be furnished involve bid responsiveness. IFR, Inc., B-203391.4, Apr. 1, 1982, 82-1 CPD Para. 292. Notwithstanding solicitation language to the contrary, information bearing on a bidder's responsibility may be furnished after bid opening. Aviation Specialists, Inc.; Aviation Enters., Inc., B-218597; B-218597.2, Aug. 15, 1985, 85-2 CPD Para. 174; Tutor-Saliba Corp., Perini Corp., Buckley & Co., Inc., and O & G Indus., Inc., A Joint Venture, B-255756, Mar. 29, 1994, 94-1 CPD Para. 223. Most of the informational requirements of the IFB were set forth in a section titled "Bidder Qualification Form." That section stated: "All bidders shall have the specified experience with the specified membranes and ability to obtain required warranties as follows." After that statement, the IFB described a 15-year manufacturer's warranty on the roofing membrane and a 2-year contractor warranty covering needed repair and/or replacement because of defective materials and workmanship. Following the warranty requirements, the IFB stated: "CONTRACTORS SHALL SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WITH THEIR BID DOCUMENTS. FAILURE TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR BID." After that statement, under the heading "Manufacturer Qualifications," the IFB included the following: "Manufacturer of roofing membrane: A company with not less than five (5) years of successful experience in manufacturing and producing materials of the type(s) specified in the project is required.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...