B-230947, Apr 28, 1988, 88-1 CPD 415
Highlights
A protester is not an interested party under the General Accounting Gffice's Bid Protest Regulations where it is the fourth low offeror and would not be in line for award should its protest against the award be sustained. Protester is not an interested party to protest award to an approved source. Since even if the protest was sustained. The protester would not be eligible for award because it is not an approved source for the needed product. The RFP is for the procurement of plastic handles in support of the 81 mm Cartridge Production Program. TPC notes that award was to be made to the lowest offeror whose proposal is acceptable and argues that Polymer's award should be set aside because it was not the lowest offeror.
B-230947, Apr 28, 1988, 88-1 CPD 415
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - Interested parties - Direct interest standards DIGEST: 1. A protester is not an interested party under the General Accounting Gffice's Bid Protest Regulations where it is the fourth low offeror and would not be in line for award should its protest against the award be sustained. PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - Interested parties 2. Protester is not an interested party to protest award to an approved source, since even if the protest was sustained, the protester would not be eligible for award because it is not an approved source for the needed product.
Technical Plastics Corporation:
Technical Plastics Corporation (TPC) protests the award of a contract to Polymer Technologies under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAAA03-87-R- 0046, issued by the Pine Bluff Arsenal, Department of the Army. The RFP is for the procurement of plastic handles in support of the 81 mm Cartridge Production Program. TPC notes that award was to be made to the lowest offeror whose proposal is acceptable and argues that Polymer's award should be set aside because it was not the lowest offeror. TPC states that the contract should be awarded to it.
We dismiss the protest based on the information supplied by the Army which shows that TPC is not an interested party under our Bid Protest Regulations. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.3(m) (1988).
TPC states in its protest that the unit price in its offer was clearly lower than the unit price of the award. However, our review of the abstract of offers supplied by the Army shows that TPC was the fourth, rather than the lowest offeror. TPC has not protested any possible award to the first, second, and third low offerors. In these circumstances, where TPC would not be in line for award of the contract if its protest were upheld, TPC is not an interested party for the purpose of protesting the agency's award to Polymer. 4 C.F,R. Sec. 21.0(a) (1987); General Electric Co., B-228465, Nov. 20, 1987, 87-2 CPD Para. 438.
Furthermore, TPC is also not an interested party because Polymer was determined to be the only approved source for the needed supplies. The specifications in the solicitation contained source controlled drawings, and Polymer has not alleged nor shown that Polymer's approval as a source was improper. Therefore, as Polymer has been determined to be the only approved source responding to the solicitation, TPC is also not an interested party for the purpose of protesting the award because its proposal, although lower priced than the awardee's, was not acceptable.
The protest is dismissed.