A recent decision highlights the difficulties a contractor faces in protesting a
decision to cancel an Invitation for Bids (IFB), at least in Maryland. The case
grew out of a large highway construction project being advertised by the
Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA). The IFB contained confusing bid
requirements for subcontractor participation goals for Minority Business
Enterprises (MBEs). In one place in the bid documents it said that the woman–
owned MBE goal was 7%. A later bid addendum, however, stated that the goal
was 10%. To make matters worse, the addendum was itself somewhat
confusing.
While the low bidder, American Infrastructure-MD (AI), submitted a bid with a
7% woman-owned MBE package, all the other bidders bid with 10% MBE
participation. At first, MdTA considered allowing AI a late (post-bid)
modification of its bid. Just before making an official award, however, MdTA
changed its mind and decided to cancel the IFB, fix the specifications and rebid
the project. AI protested the decision to the Maryland State Board of
Contract Appeals. It argued that MdTA used the confusion in the IFB as a
pretext not to the award the contract to AI.
Ober|Kaler represented the second low bidder who supported MdTA's decision.
The Board agreed with our client's position and denied AI's protest. Joseph C. Kovars discusses the case in this article.
Please see full publication below for more information.