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

LOG IN
LOG IN


B-190404 1 (1977-11-01)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadfhc0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 4 4I THE CY3MPTRI -.t.UWN GENERAL.' m DC181ON . O THE UJNITHD UTATEE WAUMINGTON, D.C. 20S6 F!LE: 5-190404 DATE: Novwber 1, 1977 MATTEiR OF: Chemical Technlogy, Inc. DIGET: Protest filed after bid opening against alleged solicitation impropriety which should have been apparent.prior to bid opening is untimely under section 20.2(b)()' of GAG's Bid Protest Proce- dures and is dismissed. Chemical Technology, Inc. (CTI) protests any award cnde: solicitation No. F65503-77-09161, Mess Attendant Jerv.crs, issued by the Air Force, Elclson Air Force Base, Alaska. CTI contends that the contracting officer denied it the opportunity ot submitting a bid by erroneously stating bond requirements under the rolicitation. CTI states that the solicitation provisions were drafted in such a -manner as to limit the response and thcreby restrict competition and that the contracting officer failed to follow published policy and procedures in Armed Forces Procurement Regulations, Section 10, Part 1 covering bid and performance bonds. Although the protester has not stated its precise objection with sufficient detail, the protest relates genarally to the alleged restrictive nature of the bond requirement stated in the solicitation. We understand from the Air Force that the proteoter did not object at any time prior to bid oiening to the solicitation. Under our Bid Protest Procedures, 4 C.F.R. I 20.2(b)(1) (1977), a protest based upon an alleged impropriety in a solicitation which is apparent prior to bid opening or the closing date for receipt of initial proposals oust be filed prior to the applicable deadline in order to be considered-by our Office. Microsurance, Inc., B-188830, April 28, 1977, 77-1 CPD 292. Since in this case, the objection appears to relate to the solicitation as issued and was not raised either with the agency or - 1-