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

B-212830.2 1 (1983-12-06)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadllb0001 and id is 1 raw text is:                                              (uLVC  O-, PLMI

                          0  THE COMPTROLLER OENERAL
    DECISION      .        . OF THE UNITED       STATES
                             AB WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20548



    FILE: B-212830.2              DATE: December 6, 1983

    MATTER OF: C&M Machine Products, Inc.--Reconsideration


    DIGEST:


        Prior decision is sustained where
        protester has not shown that contracting
        agency's failure to provide amendments to
        solicitation resulted from specific pur-
        pose of excluding protester from
        competition.

     C&M Machine Products, Inc. (C&M), requests that we
reconsider our decision in C&M Machine Products, Inc.,
B-212830, October 4, 1983, 83-2 CPD 421.

     In that decision, we considered C&M's contention that
its bid should not have been rejected as nonresponsive for
failure to acknowledge material solicitation amendments
because C&M never received the amendments. We applied the
general rule that a bidder's failure to acknowledge a
material amendment to an IFB renders the bid nonresponsive
even if the bidder did not receive the amendment unless the
procuring agency consciously or deliberately attempted to
exclude the bidder from competing in the procurement. We
noted that C&M did not suggest that it failed to receive the
amendments because of a deliberate attempt to exclude it
from the competition and that the Army explained that it did
not send C&M the amendments because C&M was not on the
bidders mailing list and the Army was not aware of C&M's
interest in the solicitation until the bids were opened. We
concluded that C&M's bid was properly rejected.

     Now, C&M disputes that the Army was not aware of C&M's
interest in the IFB until the bids were opened. C&M's
position is that the Army must have been aware of C&M's
interest in the IFB because the IFB was sent to C&M by the
Army. C&M has furnished our Office what purports to be
copies of the letter request for the IFB and of the Army
envelope in which it arrived. The envelope is addressed to
C&M on a C&M label. Apparently, the Army affixed the label
to the envelope when the IFB was sent to C&M without adding
C&M's name to the bidders mailing list. Thus, it appears

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