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

B-179934 1 (1974-01-31)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadupw0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 


                                  - -C

                                THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL
    DECISION        .           Or THE UNITED STATES
                                WAS H INGTON, o. r_        R0548
                        VN JTDt


    FILE: B-179934                     DATE: January 31, 1974

    MATTER OF: Singleton Trading Company


    DIGEST: Bid unaccomapanied by amendment shortening time for
             removal of buildings contended by bidder to have been
             furnished with bid and lost by administrative personnel,
             which is not supported by record, must be considered
             nonresponsive for failing to acknowledge material
             amendment, and bidder was not unduly prejudiced by rejec-
             tion of all bids since another opportunity to submit
             responsive bid will be provided under new solicitation.
             See decisions cited.


     On September 18, 1973, invitation for bids (IFB) No. DACA63-
74-B-0042, for the sale of four corrugated steel buildings located
at Kelly Air Force Base, Texas, was issued by the Fort Worth District
Corps of Engineers. According to the invitation, bid opening was
to be 1:00 a.m., October 18, 1973, although the administrative
agency states that the opening time was intended to be 1:00 p.m.,
October 18.


     Singleton Trading Company (Singleton) protests the rejection
of its bid. Singleton states that it was the only bidder that sub-
mitted a responsive bid prior to 1:00 a.m. and therefore was entitled
to the award. However, even if bids had to be submitted by 1:00 a.m.,
according to the record Singleton failed to acknowledge an amendment
which shortened the time in which the buildings had to be removed.
Ot= Office has held that an amendment whic) shortens the performance
period is a material amendment. B-178171fMay 31, 1973, and
B-171169,6arch 10, 1971.

     Although Singleton contends that the amendment was attached to
the bid when submitted and was lost by administrative personnel who
handled the bid, there is no evidence, other than self-serving
statements, which establishes that to be the case. Accordingly, the
Singleton bid must be considered to be nonresponsive. Since it was
administratively determined that with the exception of two bidders
who were handed the amendment a few minutes prior to bid opening at
1:00 p.m., none of the other bidders received the amendment, all
the bids were rejected.


:~ j


~33

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