About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-187253 1 (1977-03-15)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadelc0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 






                                       .
                                       .   THU COMPTROLLUN UENUPIAL
                   DECISION      ..          . THM   umT: H    e:STrms
                 %0             ~WASHINGTON.0. C. A0649

         C

                   FILa: 3-187253               DATE:  Ibrch 15, 1977

                   MAATTER OF: Amrsu qowak Asouciates, Inc.

II
                   DIGEST:

                       Claimant is not entitled to recover proposal
                       praparatfon costs where record does not show
                       that agency's rejection of oiferor's proposal
                       was deliberate or arbitrary notwithstanding
                       deficiencies noted .i agency's negutiation
                       procedures.

                       This decision involves the claim of:,auraw Nowak
                   Associates, Inc. (Wwak) for bid pr'raton  costs
                   in tes amount-of $5G1.00. In our decision o Novs-
                   ber 29. 1976. 76--2!CPD 454 this Office fund th1t the
                   Department of ?dousing and -Urban Devel`pment (iUD) had
                   erred in not conducting under the circusatances therein
                   presented, meaningful discussions with Nowak prior to
                                        it
                   accepting another proposal at a higher price and that
                   its solicitation wa reieonably subject todiffarent
                   interpretations. Rovevar, because the contract had
                   been completed, was not i1legal atd the reccrd refletaed
                   no deliberate or arbitrary-attempt to disqu;A'.ify Novak,
                   no remedisl action was recommended other than that HUD
                   insure that such procurement deficiencies not ht repeated.

                   *   The standard for determining whether to allow recovery
                   of proposal preparation costs is whether the procuring
                   ageney's actions were arbitrary and capricious toward
                   the rejected offeror. TA! Coxpany, B-181261, June 9, 1975,
                   75-1 CPD 345;VThe McCarty Corporation v. Unfi td States,
                   499 F.2d 633 (Ct. Cl. 1974). We think-that the deficien-
                   cies noted in this case were significant and impiroper but
                   as the decision of November 29, 1976 notes, vwe are unable
                   to find a deliberate or arbitrary attempt to disqualify
                   Novak. At worst, the HUD evaluators ap'per tohave bean
                   .11 error am to the tlarity of the solicitation and con-
                   Lused as to what constitutes oral or written discussions
                   a  provided in Federal Procurement Regulations 5 1-3.805-






            -I1


nU

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most