B-218135.2, MAR 1, 1985, 85-1 CPD 261
Highlights
CONTRACTS - PROTESTS - INTERESTED PARTY REQUIREMENT - PROTESTER NOT IN LINE FOR AWARD DIGEST: ASSOCIATION IS NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY TO PROTEST AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO A PARTICULAR BIDDER WHEN NONE OF ITS MEMBERS WOULD BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF THE PROTEST WERE SUSTAINED. WE DECLINED TO CONSIDER THE WORKERS ASSOCIATION'S PROTEST ALLEGING THAT THE AWARDEE DID NOT HAVE A SATISFACTORY RECORD OF BUSINESS INTEGRITY AND ETHICS AND THAT THE AWARDEE'S PERFORMANCE ON A DIFFERENT CONTRACT WITH THE BLM WAS DEFICIENT. WE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSOCIATION WASN'T AN "INTERESTED PARTY" BECAUSE THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT ANY OF ITS MEMBERS WAS IN LINE FOR AWARD. THE PROTESTER CONTENDS THAT TWO OF ITS MEMBERS BID ON THE SOLICITATION AND THAT IT IS AN INTERESTED PARTY.
B-218135.2, MAR 1, 1985, 85-1 CPD 261
CONTRACTS - PROTESTS - INTERESTED PARTY REQUIREMENT - PROTESTER NOT IN LINE FOR AWARD DIGEST: ASSOCIATION IS NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY TO PROTEST AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO A PARTICULAR BIDDER WHEN NONE OF ITS MEMBERS WOULD BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF THE PROTEST WERE SUSTAINED.
NORTHWEST FOREST WORKERS ASSOCIATION-- REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION:
NORTHWEST FOREST WORKERS ASSOCIATION REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION IN NORTHWEST FOREST WORKERS ASSOCIATION, B-217588, JAN. 24, 1985, 85-1 CPD PARA. ---, DISMISSING A PROTEST AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS (IFB) NO. OR910-IFB3-13, ISSUED BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM), DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, FOR THE PLANTING OF TREES IN COOS BAY, OREGON.
IN THE PRIOR DECISION, WE DECLINED TO CONSIDER THE WORKERS ASSOCIATION'S PROTEST ALLEGING THAT THE AWARDEE DID NOT HAVE A SATISFACTORY RECORD OF BUSINESS INTEGRITY AND ETHICS AND THAT THE AWARDEE'S PERFORMANCE ON A DIFFERENT CONTRACT WITH THE BLM WAS DEFICIENT. WE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSOCIATION WASN'T AN "INTERESTED PARTY" BECAUSE THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT ANY OF ITS MEMBERS WAS IN LINE FOR AWARD. WE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSOCIATION'S ALLEGATIONS CONCERNED AN AREA WE DID NOT REVIEW.
IN ITS RECONSIDERATION REQUEST, THE PROTESTER CONTENDS THAT TWO OF ITS MEMBERS BID ON THE SOLICITATION AND THAT IT IS AN INTERESTED PARTY; THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ERRED IN HIS DETERMINATION THAT THE AWARDEE'S PERFORMANCE OF THE DIFFERENT CONTRACT WAS SATISFACTORY; AND THAT THE AWARDEE'S EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY (EEO) FILINGS WERE NOT IN ORDER.
AS WE STATED IN OUR PRIOR DECISION, IN DETERMINING WHETHER A TRADE ASSOCIATION QUALIFIES AS AN INTERESTED PARTY, WE FOCUS UPON THE INTEREST ITS CONSTITUENT MEMBERS MAY HAVE IN THE PROCUREMENT. SEE ASSOCIATION OF SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERS, B-199548, SEPT. 15, 1980, 80-2 CPD PARA. 196, REV'D ON OTHER GROUNDS, B-199548.2, AUG. 13, 1982, 82-2 CPD PARA. 128. HERE, THE WORKERS ASSOCIATION DOES NOT ASSERT THAT ANY OF ITS MEMBERS IS THE SECOND OR THIRD-LOW BIDDER, SO AS TO BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF WE WERE TO SUSTAIN THE PROTEST-- IT MERELY ASSERTS THAT TWO OF ITS MEMBERS BID ON THE SOLICITATION. HENCE, THERE IS STILL NO SHOWING THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF THE TRADE ASSOCIATION HAS THE REQUISITE DIRECT AND SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN A PROTEST. SEE INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INVESTMENTS, B-202164.2, JUNE 8, 1981, 81-1 CPD PARA. 459. IF NONE OF THE MEMBERS OF A TRADE ASSOCIATION IS AN INTERESTED PARTY, THE TRADE ASSOCIATION ITSELF CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AN INTERESTED PARTY. COMMITTEE OF DOMESTIC STEEL WIRE ROPE & SPECIALTY CABLE MANUFACTURERS, B-208801, SEPT. 15, 1982, 82-2 CPD PARA. 231.
THE PRIOR DECISION IS AFFIRMED.