B-182550, DEC 3, 1974

B-182550: Dec 3, 1974

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

LETTER REQUESTING "EXPLANATION OF LEGITIMACY OF MY COMPLAINT" WHILE NOT CONTAINING SPECIFIC WORDS OF PROTEST WILL BE CONSIDERED AS PROTEST UNDER BID PROTEST PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS. FILING MORE THAN 4 MONTHS AFTER BASIS FOR PROTEST WAS KNOWN RENDERS PROTEST UNTIMELY. WE WILL. PAN ASIA ALLEGES THAT THE AWARD VIOLATES THE POLICY EXPRESSED IN THE BUY AMERICAN ACT AND WILL RESULT IN THE GOVERNMENT RECEIVING A LEVEL OF COMPETENCY BELOW THAT OF UNITED STATES A-E FIRMS. THE PROTESTER SUGGESTS THAT THE SELECTION WAS PREDICATED UPON PRICE FACTORS AND NOT A-E COMPETENCY IN CONTRAVENTION OF PUBLIC LAW 92-582 (THE BROOKS BILL). STATE IN PERTINENT PART THAT: "*** BID PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED NOT LATER THAN 5 (WORKING) DAYS AFTER THE BASIS FOR PROTEST IS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN.

B-182550, DEC 3, 1974

LETTER REQUESTING "EXPLANATION OF LEGITIMACY OF MY COMPLAINT" WHILE NOT CONTAINING SPECIFIC WORDS OF PROTEST WILL BE CONSIDERED AS PROTEST UNDER BID PROTEST PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 20 (1974); HOWEVER, FILING MORE THAN 4 MONTHS AFTER BASIS FOR PROTEST WAS KNOWN RENDERS PROTEST UNTIMELY.

PAN ASIA ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS:

PAN ASIA ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS, IN A LETTER DATED OCTOBER 21, 1974, RELATES THAT IN JUNE OF 1974 THE KADENA AIR BASE PROCUREMENT CENTER, AFTER A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY, AWARDED AN ARCHITECT-ENGINEERING (A-E) CONTRACT FOR DESIGN WORK TO A JAPANESE FIRM. THIS LETTER, ALTHOUGH NOT CONTAINING SPECIFIC WORDS OF PROTEST, REQUESTS "*** AN EXPLANATION OF THE LEGITIMACY OF MY COMPLAINT." WE WILL, THEREFORE, CONSIDER THE MATTER AS A PROTEST UNDER OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 20 (1974). SEE MATTER OF JOHNSON ASSOCIATES INC., 53 COMP. GEN. 518 (1974).

PAN ASIA ALLEGES THAT THE AWARD VIOLATES THE POLICY EXPRESSED IN THE BUY AMERICAN ACT AND WILL RESULT IN THE GOVERNMENT RECEIVING A LEVEL OF COMPETENCY BELOW THAT OF UNITED STATES A-E FIRMS. MOREOVER, THE PROTESTER SUGGESTS THAT THE SELECTION WAS PREDICATED UPON PRICE FACTORS AND NOT A-E COMPETENCY IN CONTRAVENTION OF PUBLIC LAW 92-582 (THE BROOKS BILL).

HOWEVER, OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 20.2(A) (1974), STATE IN PERTINENT PART THAT:

"*** BID PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED NOT LATER THAN 5 (WORKING) DAYS AFTER THE BASIS FOR PROTEST IS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. ***"

SINCE PAN ASIA APPARENTLY BECAME AWARE OF THE BASIS FOR ITS PROTEST SOME TIME IN JUNE OF 1974, THE FILING OF A PROTEST ON OCTOBER 30, 1974, IS CLEARLY UNTIMELY UNDER OUR PROCEDURES.

ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE CLOSING OUR FILES WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION OF THE MERITS OF THE PROTEST.