About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-186047 1 (1976-06-25)

handle is hein.gao/gaobaddcp0001 and id is 1 raw text is: ~01,L ER 0, THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL DECISION . 2J OF THE UNITED STATES VWASH IN GTO N. D.C. 20548 FILE: B-186047 DATE: June 25, 1976 MATTER OF: Victory Salvage Company Walker - Moody Construction Company, Ltd. Barstow Truck Parts and Equipment Company, Inc. DIGEST: Bid submitted in name of apparent joint venture accom- panied by bid bond containing name of principal differing from one of the parties to the joint venture must be rejected as nonresponsive because of the discrepancy. Defect may not be cured by post-bid opening clarification. Victory Salvage Company (Victory) and Walker - Moody Construction Company, Ltd. (Walker), the alleged second high bidders on various items under Surplus Sale IFB No. 60-6031, have protested the prospective award of any contract to Barstow Truck Parts and Equipment Company, Inc. (Barstow), the apparent high bidder on those items, on the basis of a purported defi- ciency in Barstow's bid bond which arguably renders that bid nonresponsive. The subject IFB, issued by the Defense Supply Agency's (DSA) Defense Property Disposal Region, Pearl City, Hawaii, solicited bids for a variety of surplus vehicles and equipment and required, inter alia, the submission of a bid deposit in an amount not less than 20 percent of the total bid. The solic- itation further authorized the submission of an approved annual deposit bond in lieu of a bid deposit, provided that it was in an acceptable form. Upon the opening of bids, it was discovered that while the face of Barstow's bid set forth Barstow Truck Parts and Equipment and Klayer Associates as the nominal bidders, the bid was accompanied by an annual deposit bond naming Barstow as principal but was amended to cover bids also submitted by John Tallman of Honolulu, Hawaii. There was no information either in the bid itself or the accompanying bond indicating the relationship of Mr. Tallman to either Klayer Associates or Barstow. Both Victory and Walker argue that since the bid of the apparent joint venture is supported by a bond naming only one of the joint venturers as principal, and that Klayer Associates is not supported by the bond, the bond does not con- stitute an acceptable form of bid deposit and the bid must there- fore be rejected as nonresponsive. DSA apparently concurs with Victory and Walker, recommending that Barstow's bid be rejected. - 1 -

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:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most