[Request for Review of Air Force Off-Set for Freight Loss]
Highlights
A carrier requested review of its denied claim for refund of an offset for the loss of an Air Force member's household goods, contending that: (1) there was no evidence that the missing item was ever tendered to it; and (2) the described item could not fit in the shipping container used. GAO held that: (1) two entries in the shipping inventory referred generally to the missing item; (2) the member used the catalog description of the item merely to show the type of item tendered rather than the actual item; and (3) the member provided sufficient evidence that the missing item was tendered. Accordingly, the settlement was affirmed.
B-220378, JAN 17, 1986, 86-1 CPD 59
CONTRACTS - PROTESTS - MOOT, ACADEMIC, ETC. QUESTIONS - SOLICITATION CANCELED DIGEST: ALLEGATION THAT THE NAVY IMPROPERLY REJECTED PROTESTER'S PROPOSAL AS TECHNICALLY UNACCEPTABLE IS RENDERED ACADEMIC WHERE THE NAVY ADVISES THAT NO FUNDING FOR THE CANCELED SOLICITATION REMAINS AVAILABLE.
ASSOCIATES FOR RESEARCH AND TRAINING, INC.:
ASSOCIATES FOR RESEARCH AND TRAINING, INC. (ASSOCIATES), PROTESTS THE CANCELLATION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. N00600-85-R-1135, A TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE, ISSUED BY THE NAVAL REGIONAL CONTRACTING CENTER (NAVY), WASHINGTON, D.C., FOR A MANAGER TRAINING PROGRAM. ASSOCIATES ALLEGES THAT ITS PROPOSAL WAS IMPROPERLY REJECTED AS TECHNICALLY UNACCEPTABLE.
WE DISMISS THE PROTEST.
THE NAVY CONTENDS THAT THE PROTEST IS ACADEMIC BECAUSE ALL OFFERS WERE FOUND TO BE TECHNICALLY UNACCEPTABLE AND THE RFP WAS CANCELED. FURTHER, FOLLOWING THE CANCELLATION AND PROTEST, THE NAVY ADVISES THAT IT HAS NO PLANS TO RESOLICIT BECAUSE NO FUNDING FOR THE REQUIREMENT REMAINS AVAILABLE.
ORDINARILY, WHEN A PROTESTER PROTESTS A CANCELED SOLICITATION, THE CANCELLATION IN ITSELF WOULD NOT RENDER THE PROTEST ACADEMIC BECAUSE THE RELEVANT QUESTION TO BE RESOLVED IS THE PROPRIETY OF THE REASON FOR CANCELLATION. SINCE THE REASON FOR THE CANCELLATION BY THE NAVY WAS THE ALLEGED TECHNICAL UNACCEPTABILITY OF ASSOCIATE'S PROPOSAL, LEAVING NO ACCEPTABLE PROPOSALS, THE CANCELLATION CANNOT RENDER THE PROTEST ACADEMIC BECAUSE THE PROPRIETY OF THE NAVY'S DETERMINATION OF TECHNICAL UNACCEPTABILITY IS STILL UNRESOLVED. SEE MAGNAVOX ADVANCED PRODUCTS AND SYSTEMS CO., B-215426, FEB. 6, 1985, 85-1 CPD PARA. 146. HOWEVER, IN LIGHT OF THE NAVY'S DISCLOSURE THAT NO FUNDING FOR THE REQUIREMENT REMAINS AVAILABLE, WE FIND THAT THE PROTEST IS ACADEMIC. SEE 4 C.F.R. 21.3(F) (1985). IT WOULD SERVE NO USEFUL PURPOSE TO ISSUE A DECISION WHERE THE PROTESTER WOULD NOT GAIN A REMEDY.
REGARDING THE NAVY'S ORIGINAL DECISION TO CANCEL ON THE BASIS THAT NO PROPOSALS WERE ACCEPTABLE, EVEN IF WE ASSUME THE NAVY'S ACTION WAS IMPROPER, THE LACK OF FUNDING WHICH WAS MENTIONED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE NAVY'S SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT IS AN APPROPRIATE BASIS TO SUPPORT THE CANCELLATION HERE. SEE AMRAY, INC., B-210490, FEB. 7, 1983, 83-1 CPD PARA. 135.
THE PROTEST IS DISMISSED.