B-223590.2, AUG 28, 1986, CPD 237
Highlights
IS UNTIMELY AND THEREFORE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. KING FISHER CONTENDS THAT THE SOLE-SOURCE IS UNJUSTIFIED. WAS ADVISED OF THE BASIS FOR THE AIR FORCE'S DETERMINATION TO PROCURE BY OTHER THAN OPEN COMPETITION IN A LETTER DATED JUNE 4. WE DISMISSED KING-FISHER'S PROTEST BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS OF WHEN KING-FISHER LEARNED OF THE BASIS FOR ITS PROTEST. IS ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE RFP. IT IS NOT CLEAR WHEN KING-FISHER MAY HAVE RECEIVED IT. THE GRAVAMAN OF KING-FISHER'S COMPLAINT STILL IS THAT THIS IS A SOLE-SOURCE PROCUREMENT. UNTIMELY WHEN IT WAS FIRST FILED ON JULY 9. STILL IS UNTIMELY. THE PROTEST IS DISMISSED.
B-223590.2, AUG 28, 1986, CPD 237
CONTRACTS - PROTESTS - GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE PROCEDURES - TIMELINESS OF PROTEST - DATA BASIS OF PROTEST MADE KNOWN TO PROTESTER DIGEST: PROTEST AGAINST SOLE-SOURCE PROCUREMENT, FILED MORE THAN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER PROTESTER LEARNED OF BASIS FOR PROTEST, IS UNTIMELY AND THEREFORE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.
KING-FISHER COMPANY:
KING-FISHER COMPANY PROTESTS A SOLE-SOURCE AWARD UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RPF) NO. F39601-86-R-0036, ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE FOR THE ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION OF A FIRE ALARM RECEIVER AND RELATED EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY MOTOROLA, INC. THE AIR FORCE JUSTIFIED PROCUREMENT BY OTHER THAN OPEN COMPETITION THROUGH A COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENT WITH EXISTING MOTOROLA EQUIPMENT. KING FISHER CONTENDS THAT THE SOLE-SOURCE IS UNJUSTIFIED.
THE RECORD SHOWS THAT KING-FISHER LEARNED OF THIS PROCUREMENT THROUGH AN ANNOUNCEMENT IN THE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY DATED MAY 24, 1986, AND WAS ADVISED OF THE BASIS FOR THE AIR FORCE'S DETERMINATION TO PROCURE BY OTHER THAN OPEN COMPETITION IN A LETTER DATED JUNE 4, WHICH ALSO DECLINED TO PROVIDE KING-FISHER WITH A COPY OF THE RFP. ON JULY 9, KING-FISHER FILED A PROTEST WITH OUR OFFICE OBJECTING TO THE SOLE SOURCE NATURE OF THIS PROCUREMENT. WE DISMISSED KING-FISHER'S PROTEST BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS OF WHEN KING-FISHER LEARNED OF THE BASIS FOR ITS PROTEST, AS REQUIRED UNDER OUR BID PROTEST REGULATIONS, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.2(A)(2) (1986).
ALTHOUGH KING-FISHER'S CURRENT PROTEST, FILED ON AUG. 22, IS ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE RFP, AND IT IS NOT CLEAR WHEN KING-FISHER MAY HAVE RECEIVED IT, THE GRAVAMAN OF KING-FISHER'S COMPLAINT STILL IS THAT THIS IS A SOLE-SOURCE PROCUREMENT. KING-FISHER KNEW THIS, AND THE BASIS FOR THE AIR FORCE'S DETERMINATION TO PROCURE BY OTHER THAN OPEN COMPETITION, NO LATER THAN THE DATE THE FIRM RECEIVED THE AIR FORCE'S LETTER OF JUNE 4. CONSEQUENTLY, KING-FISHER'S PROTEST, UNTIMELY WHEN IT WAS FIRST FILED ON JULY 9, STILL IS UNTIMELY.
THE PROTEST IS DISMISSED.