Enviromediation Services, LLC, B-280643, November 2, 1998

B-280643 Nov 02, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Bidder's bid was improperly rejected as nonresponsive for the failure to acknowledge receipt of the amendment. Enviromediation's bid was rejected as nonresponsive because the firm did not acknowledge in its bid the receipt of an amendment which deleted one item of work. Bidders were to submit one price for the removal and disposal of all indicated asbestos-containing materials in the two housing units prior to general demolition of the units. Bidders were to submit a price for the additional cost of disposing of demolition debris if it consisted of lead-based paint materials. " the IFB was amended to delete unit bid item 001. A revised schedule was attached. Eight bids were opened on June 25. View Decision Matter of: Enviromediation Services, LLC File: B-280643 Date: November 2, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Enviromediation Services, LLC protests the rejection of its bid under invitation for bids (IFB) No. DTCG83-98-B-3WF199, issued by the United States Coast Guard for demolition of two housing units and construction of a parking lot. Enviromediation's bid was rejected as nonresponsive because the firm did not acknowledge in its bid the receipt of an amendment which deleted one item of work. Enviromediation argues that since the price it bid for the deleted work can simply be deducted from its total bid price, it should receive the award based upon its low total bid price for the work under the amended IFB. We sustain the protest. The IFB required bidders to submit prices for a basic bid and three unit bid items. IFB Sec. B, at 3. Under the basic bid, bidders were to submit one price for the removal and disposal of all indicated asbestos-containing materials in the two housing units prior to general demolition of the units, for procuring an independent sampling and testing company to perform testing for lead-based paint materials prior to general demolition of the units, for the demolition of the units and disposal of all demolition debris as normal construction debris, and for the removal and disposal of housing unit concrete slabs and footings, timber piles and utility lines. Under unit bid item 001, bidders were to submit a price for the additional cost of disposing of demolition debris if it consisted of lead-based paint materials. Unit bid item 002 required a price for the disposal of the concrete entrance drive and other miscellaneous site features and the construction of a new asphalt concrete parking area and court area. Unit bid item 003 required a price for the removal/disposal of the buried water supply or sanitary sewer piping of the two units, treating these as asbestos-containing material. Id. Prior to bid opening, in response to a request for information from a potential bidder pointing out that unit bid item 001 did not specify any "quantifiable data" regarding the lead-based paint debris or identify in the specifications "allowable method(s) of disposal," the IFB was amended to delete unit bid item 001, and a revised schedule was attached. Request For Information from J.L. Young Enters., Inc., June 5, 1998; IFB amend. 0001, Sec. B, at 3. Eight bids were opened on June 25, 1998. Total prices, apart from the Enviromediation bid, ranged from $142,990 to $230,817.97. Abstract of Offers-Construction. The government estimate for the work, as amended, was $164,988. Id. at 1. Enviromediation submitted prices for all four items with a total price of $178,324. Enviromediation Bid at 1. It did not acknowledge in its bid the receipt of the amendment deleting unit bid item 001--pricing the disposal of lead-based paint debris, if required. Enviromediation submitted the original schedule and priced the lead-based paint debris disposal at $75,373. Id. at 3. If $75,373 was deleted from Enviromediation's bid, Enviromediation would be the low bidder with a total price of $102,951. Abstract of Offers-Construction; Enviromediation's Bid at 1. After the Coast Guard rejected the Enviromediation bid as nonresponsive due to the failure to acknowledge the amendment, award was made to the low, responsive bidder. Contracting Officer's Summary of Facts at 2. The agency argues that the deleted unit bid item 001 lacked sufficient information to permit the computation of an intelligent bid price, and therefore the amendment correcting the deficiency was material. Accordingly, the agency asserts that Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 14.405(d), which permits the failure to acknowledge an amendment to be waived if the amendment involves only a matter of form or has either no effect or merely a negligible effect on price, quantity, quality, or delivery, is inapplicable here. Memorandum of Law at 2-4. The agency notes that one bidder submitted in essence two bids: one with prices for all four of the original items and one for the three items remaining in the amended IFB.