Constructive Solutions, Inc., B-278227, January 9, 1998

B-278227 Jan 09, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The first sentence in the bid schedule stated that "[a]ll of the bid proposals for the items below is required.". The soil must be remediated until TPH [total petroleum hydrocarbon] levels are less than 100 PPM. Take additional soil samples for TPH (EPA Method 8015 modified for diesel) cost per sample. $______ Ten bids were received. "[a]ll of the bid proposals for the items below is required". She concluded that the IFB was ambiguous and that the ambiguity had led several bidders (including the protester) to submit what the agency considered nonresponsive bids. CSI argues that the cancellation was improper. " only one price per line item was necessary. CSI concludes that cancellation was not justified by any confusion regarding item 2. View Decision Matter of: Constructive Solutions, Inc. File: B-278227 Date: January 9, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Constructive Solutions, Inc. (CSI) protests the decision to cancel invitation for bids (IFB) No. NOO-97-31, issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Department of the Interior, for environmental cleanup work at the Kaibeto Boarding School in Kaibeto, Arizona. We deny the protest. The IFB contemplated the award of a contract to furnish all materials, labor, equipment and supervision for the removal of underground storage tanks (UST), aboveground storage tanks (AST), and disposal of contaminated soil. The first sentence in the bid schedule stated that "[a]ll of the bid proposals for the items below is required." Below this sentence, the schedule contained the following three items: Item No. Bid Amount: 1. Remove and dispose of all USTs and ASTs, and related appurtenances, pipes, supply and return lines in accordance with applicable Federal, State and Tribal regulations. $______ 2. Remove all contaminated soil testing 100 PPM [parts per million] or greater (approximate quantity [+ or -] 1,500 cubic yard) and haul it off to an approved landfill for remediation and disposal. $______ OR Bio-remediate approximately [+ or -] 1,500 cubic yards of contaminated soil at a place designated by the Contracting Officer within the school compound. The soil must be remediated until TPH [total petroleum hydrocarbon] levels are less than 100 PPM. The process may not take more than six months. $______ 3. Take additional soil samples for TPH (EPA Method 8015 modified for diesel) cost per sample. $______ Ten bids were received. Four of the bids, including CSI's, failed to include prices for both options under item 2. The contracting officer reportedly intended the first sentence of the schedule--"[a]ll of the bid proposals for the items below is required"--to make clear that BIA intended bidders to price all items, including both options in item 2. In light of several of the bidders' failure to do so, she concluded that the IFB was ambiguous and that the ambiguity had led several bidders (including the protester) to submit what the agency considered nonresponsive bids. Thereafter, for this and other reasons, BIA canceled the solicitation. CSI argues that the cancellation was improper. Regarding the option prices under item 2, CSI maintains that the IFB in fact clearly did not require prices for both options. According to the protester, since the first sentence in the schedule refers to "items" rather than "options" or each "bid amount," only one price per line item was necessary. CSI concludes that cancellation was not justified by any confusion regarding item 2, and that it should receive the award as the low bidder. An agency generally may cancel an IFB after bid opening and exposure of prices only where there is a compelling reason to do so. Federal Acquisition Regulation Sec. 14.404-1(a)(1); City Wide Press, Inc., B-231469, Aug. 10, 1988, 88-2 CPD Para. 127 at 2. Whether cancellation is warranted is a decision for the contracting agency, whose determination we will not disturb unless it is shown to be unreasonable. Id. at 2-3. In this regard, we generally consider cancellation after bid opening to be appropriate when an award under the solicitation would not serve the government's actual needs. Berendse & Sons Paint Co., B-262244, Nov. 21, 1995, 95-2 CPD Para. 235 at 3. Here, BIA's decision to cancel the solicitation is unobjectionable. The agency explains that, in a last-minute change to the IFB before it was issued, the second (bioremediation) alternative was added to item 2. This change apparently reflected an intent to use the alternative prices as one of the considerations in determining which of the two methods to select, although the IFB did not clarify how the agency would do so or, indeed, how the agency would take into account any factor except price in the context of an invitation for bids.