[Protest of Any EPA Contract Award for Security Support Services]
B-217488: Aug 16, 1985
- Full Report:
A firm protested an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contract award for security services, contending that: (1) it was not given sufficient time to prepare a proposal; (2) EPA improperly modified a contract and awarded a sole-source contract even though many qualified companies could accomplish the work; and (3) the request for proposals was advertised incorrectly. GAO has held that a contract award is not improper solely because a bidder did not receive a copy of the solicitation, so long as there is adequate competition resulting in reasonable prices and there has been no deliberate or conscious intent on the part of the procuring agency to preclude competition. GAO found that the protester: (1) did not challenge the adequacy of the competition or the reasonableness of the prices obtained; and (2) offered no evidence that EPA deliberately precluded it from the competition. In addition, GAO found that the protester failed to show that the contract modification which resulted in a sole-source contract award was improper. An agency decision to modify a contract is a matter of contract administration and is not for GAO consideration. Finally, GAO found that the protest concerning the manner in which the procurement was advertised was untimely since it was filed more than 10 working days after constructive knowledge of the matter. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.