B-177153, JAN 23, 1973
Highlights
GAO DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO COMPEL SBA TO REVIEW ITS PRIOR DECISION. THE REFUSAL OF THE SBA TO ISSUE A COC IS AN AFFIRMATION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION OF NONRESPONSIBILITY. 43 COMP. ANY OBJECTIONS TO A SOLICITATION WHICH ARE APPARENT PRIOR TO BID OPENING MUST BE PROTESTED PRIOR TO BID OPENING. TO ORLOTRONICS CORPORATION: THIS IS IN REPLY TO YOUR LETTERS OF SEPTEMBER 27 AND DECEMBER 18. YOU STATE THAT YOUR FIRM WAS DENIED A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY (COC) BY THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (SBA) ON THE BASIS THAT IT IS UNABLE TO MEET THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE. YOU ARGUE THAT WHILE THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE OF 60 DAYS IS "TIGHT". THERE IS SUFFICIENT TIME IN WHICH TO OBTAIN THE NECESSARY MATERIALS AND TO PRODUCE THE ITEMS.
B-177153, JAN 23, 1973
BID PROTEST - SBA DETERMINATIONS - NONRESPONSIBILITY - PROTEST TIMING DECISION DENYING THE PROTEST OF ORLOTRONICS CORPORATION AGAINST AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANY OTHER FIRM UNDER AN IFB ISSUED AT RICHARDS-GEBAUR AFB, MO. GAO DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO COMPEL SBA TO REVIEW ITS PRIOR DECISION, REOPEN THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF NEW EVIDENCE, 51 COMP. GEN. 448, 451 (1972), OR ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY (COC). B 175970, JULY 18, 1972. ACCORDINGLY, THE REFUSAL OF THE SBA TO ISSUE A COC IS AN AFFIRMATION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION OF NONRESPONSIBILITY. 43 COMP. GEN. 228 (1963). ALSO, ANY OBJECTIONS TO A SOLICITATION WHICH ARE APPARENT PRIOR TO BID OPENING MUST BE PROTESTED PRIOR TO BID OPENING. SEE 4 CFR 20.2(A).
TO ORLOTRONICS CORPORATION:
THIS IS IN REPLY TO YOUR LETTERS OF SEPTEMBER 27 AND DECEMBER 18, 1972, RELATIVE TO YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANY OTHER FIRM UNDER IFB F23608-73-B-0004, ISSUED AT RICHARDS-GEBAUR AIR FORCE BASE, MISSOURI.
YOU STATE THAT YOUR FIRM WAS DENIED A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY (COC) BY THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (SBA) ON THE BASIS THAT IT IS UNABLE TO MEET THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE. YOU ARGUE THAT WHILE THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE OF 60 DAYS IS "TIGHT", THERE IS SUFFICIENT TIME IN WHICH TO OBTAIN THE NECESSARY MATERIALS AND TO PRODUCE THE ITEMS, AND THAT OTHER BIDDERS WILL USE THE SAME SUPPLIERS AS YOUR FIRM AND ARE FACED WITH THE SAME DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS.
THIS OFFICE DOES NOT HAVE AUTHORITY TO COMPEL SBA TO EITHER REVIEW ITS PRIOR DECISION OR TO REOPEN THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF NEW EVIDENCE. COMP. GEN. 448, 451 (1972). NEITHER DO WE REVIEW SBA DETERMINATIONS IN SUCH MATTERS OR HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE THE ISSUANCE OF A COC. 175970, JULY 18, 1972.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE MUST REGARD THE REFUSAL OF SBA TO ISSUE A COC AS AN AFFIRMATION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION OF NONRESPONSIBILITY, AND AS PERSUASIVE WITH RESPECT TO THE COMPETENCY OF YOUR COMPANY TO PERFORM THE INSTANT CONTRACT. 43 COMP. GEN. 228 (1963). ACCORDINGLY, YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE DETERMINATION OF NONRESPONSIBILITY AND THE REFUSAL BY SBA TO ISSUE A COC MUST BE DENIED.
WITH REGARD TO YOUR QUESTIONS RELATIVE TO THE REALISM OF THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE, WE NOTE THAT YOU DO NOT CONTEND THE SCHEDULE IS IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET. MOREOVER, AS GROUNDS FOR A PROTEST, ANY SUCH OBJECTIONS WERE APPARENT PRIOR TO BID OPENING, AND A PROTEST BASED THEREON WAS THEREFORE REQUIRED TO BE FILED PRIOR TO BID OPENING. SEE 4 CFR 20.2(A).
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT WE CAN BE OF ANY FURTHER ASSISTANCE TO YOU IN THIS MATTER.