B-173580, FEB 22, 1973

B-173580: Feb 22, 1973

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

AT THE TIME YOUR PROTEST WAS FILED. THE LEGALITY OF THIS PROGRAM WAS BEING LITIGATED. WE THEREFORE WITHHELD ACTION ON YOUR PROTEST UNTIL A DEFINITIVE JUDICIAL RULING WAS REACHED. THE PROTEST IS DENIED.

B-173580, FEB 22, 1973

BID PROTEST - SECTION 8(A) PROGRAM DECISION DENYING THE PROTEST OF KENTUCKY BUILDING MAINTENANCE, INC., AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF A CONTRACT AWARD MADE PURSUANT TO THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION'S SECTION 8(A) MINORITY ENTERPRISE PROGRAM, FOR CUSTODIAL SERVICES AT GRISSOM AFB, PERU, IND. INASMUCH AS THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT IN THE CASE OF RAY BAILLIE TRASH HAULING, INC. V. KLEPPE, NO. 72-1163, HAS DECLARED THE SECTION 8(A) PROGRAM VALID AND CONSTITUTIONAL, AND ABSENT ANY DIFFERENT RESULT IN ANY OTHER CIRCUIT, GAO FINDS NO BASIS TO QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE CONTRACT AWARD.

TO W. W. STOREY:

WE REFER AGAIN TO YOUR LETTER DATED JULY 2, 1971, WITH ENCLOSURE, PROTESTING ON BEHALF OF KENTUCKY BUILDING MAINTENANCE, INCORPORATED, AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF A CONTRACT AWARD MADE PURSUANT TO THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION'S SECTION 8(A) MINORITY ENTERPRISE PROGRAM, FOR CUSTODIAL SERVICES AT GRISSON AIR FORCE BASE, PERU, INDIANA.

AT THE TIME YOUR PROTEST WAS FILED, THE LEGALITY OF THIS PROGRAM WAS BEING LITIGATED, AND WE THEREFORE WITHHELD ACTION ON YOUR PROTEST UNTIL A DEFINITIVE JUDICIAL RULING WAS REACHED.

ON JANUARY 5, 1973, THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT RULED, IN THE CASE OF RAY BAILLIE TRASH HAULING, INCORPORATED V. KLEPPE, NO. 72-1163, THAT THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION MAY ACCEPT CONTRACT AWARDS FROM OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND SUBCONTRACT THE WORK TO SOCIALLY OR ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED PERSONS UNDER THE PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY SBA. INASMUCH AS THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT HAS DECLARED THE SECTION 8(A) PROGRAM VALID AND CONSTITUTIONAL, AND ABSENT ANY DIFFERENT RESULT OUTSTANDING IN ANY OTHER CIRCUIT COURT, WE FIND NO BASIS TO QUESTION ITS VALIDITY.

ACCORDINGLY, THE PROTEST IS DENIED.