B-241031.3, Oct 31, 1990, 90-2 CPD 355

B-241031.3: Oct 31, 1990

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Shirley Jones
(202) 512-8156
jonessa@gao.gov

 

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

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration is dismissed where the issue was considered and denied in an earlier protest involving the same parties. Should have been set aside for small disadvantaged businesses (SDBs). /1/ We dismiss the request for reconsideration without receiving an agency report. We decided that DLA properly did not set aside the procurement for SDBs where it had determined that there was no expectation of receiving offers from two or more SDBs which would be eligible for award as manufacturers/producers or regular dealers as required by the Walsh Healey Act. Which we held was applicable to this kind of procurement.

B-241031.3, Oct 31, 1990, 90-2 CPD 355

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration is dismissed where the issue was considered and denied in an earlier protest involving the same parties.

Attorneys

Commercial Energies, Inc.-- Reconsideration:

In a request for reconsideration, Commercial Energies, Inc. (CEI) protests that request for proposals (RFP) No. DLA600-90-R-0151, issued by the Defense Fuel Supply Center, Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), for the supply of natural gas, should have been set aside for small disadvantaged businesses (SDBs). /1/

We dismiss the request for reconsideration without receiving an agency report. Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.3(m) (1990).

At the time we opened this protest for development we had under consideration, but had not yet decided, a prior protest concerning RFP No. DLA600-90-R-O126, issued by DLA for the supply of natural gas. Commercial Energies, Inc., B-240148, Oct. 19, 1990, 90-2 CPD Para. ***, we decided that DLA properly did not set aside the procurement for SDBs where it had determined that there was no expectation of receiving offers from two or more SDBs which would be eligible for award as manufacturers/producers or regular dealers as required by the Walsh Healey Act, which we held was applicable to this kind of procurement. CEI has raised the same issues in this protest and since it does not contend in its protest that it qualifies as a manufacturer/producer or regular dealer under the Walsh-Healey Act, no purpose would be served in reconsidering this issue here. /2/ The request for reconsideration is dismissed.

/1/ CEI previously filed protests (B-241031 and B-241031.2) which we interpreted as challenging the agency's selection of standard industrial classification codes, matters which are for review solely by the Small Business Administration. 15 U.S.C. Sec. 637(b)(6) (1988). CEI's request for reconsideration makes plain that its protest concerns the decision whether to set the procurement aside for SDBs. Accordingly, we determined to develop the protest and request an agency report.

/2/ CEI also requested a conference in this case, but in view of our decision, a conference would serve no useful purpose.

Nov 25, 2020

Nov 24, 2020

Nov 20, 2020

Nov 19, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here