[Protest of Proposed DLA Contract Award for Electric Motors]
Highlights
A firm protested a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) contract award for electric motors, contending that the awardee underbid it by gaining improper access to its prior contract for the same equipment. GAO held that the protest was speculative and did not include any valid basis for protest. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.
B-229671, Dec 10, 1987, 87-2 CPD 581
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - Allegation Substantiation - Lacking - GAO Review DIGEST: Protest alleging that awardee received inside information is dismissed where only evidence submitted by protester is fact that awardee submitted a lower price. General Accounting Office does not conduct investigations to establish validity of protester's speculative statements.
Electra-Motion, Inc.:
Electra-Motion, Inc. protests the proposed award of a contract to Motor Technologies, Inc. under Defense Logistics Agency's (DLA) request for proposals (RFP) No. DLA-400-87-R-5632 for electric motors.
Electra-Motion argues that Motor Technologies, the low offeror, had possible inside information regarding the solicitation. According to the protester, Motor Technologies in its current bid deleted $42,500 from the price it offered for a first article under an earlier solicitation for the same items and lowered its unit prices for production items because it had access to "bidder information" as the result of the termination of the protester's prior contract for these same motors. ElectraMotion requests that this Office conduct an investigation of the matter.
Electra-Motion has submitted no evidence that DLA disclosed any information to Motor Technologies. Its only evidence is Motor Technologies' lower price. The fact that Motor Technologies happened to underbid the protester in and of itself certainly does not show that Motor Technologies had improper access to agency information regarding the procurement. The protest thus is based upon speculation only. Our Office will not find improper action by an agency based on conjecture or inference. It is also not our practice to conduct investigations pursuant to our bid protest function for the purpose of establishing the validity of a protester's speculative statements. See Key Book Service, Inc., B-226775, Apr. 29, 1987, 87-1 CPD Para. 454.
Electra-Motion's submission does not indicate any valid basis for protest. Accordingly, pursuant to our Bid Protest Regulations at 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.3(f) (1987), the protest is dismissed.