Skip to Highlights
Highlights

DIGEST: PROTEST THAT COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED ON A SOLE -SOURCE BASIS IS DISMISSED SINCE PROTEST IS BASED ON APPARENT IMPROPRIETIES IN SOLICITATION AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED WITH GAO PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF QUOTATIONS. ON A SOLE-SOURCE BASIS BECAUSE ONLY ITS PART WILL ENSURE PROPER PERFORMANCE OF THE REPAIRED EQUIPMENT. REGARDING THE CONTENTION THAT THE SOLICITATION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT. WORTHINGTON'S LETTER OF PROTEST WAS NOT FILED UNTIL AFTER IT WAS ADVISED BY THE NAVY OF THE AWARD TO RAM. SINCE WORTHINGTON'S PROTEST WAS FILED AFTER THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF QUOTATIONS. IT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. OUR OFFICE WILL NOT REVIEW A PROTEST THAT AN AGENCY SHOULD PROCURE AN ITEM FROM A PARTICULAR FIRM ON A SOLE-SOURCE BASIS.

View Decision

B-207008, APR 21, 1982

DIGEST: PROTEST THAT COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED ON A SOLE -SOURCE BASIS IS DISMISSED SINCE PROTEST IS BASED ON APPARENT IMPROPRIETIES IN SOLICITATION AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED WITH GAO PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF QUOTATIONS.

WORTHINGTON GROUP, MCGRAW-EDISON COMPANY:

WORTHINGTON GROUP, MCGRAW-EDISON COMPANY (WORTHINGTON) PROTESTS AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO RAM ENTERPRISES TO SUPPLY PARTS, ISSUED BY THE NAVY SHIP PARTS CONTROL CENTER (NAVY) UNDER REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS (RFQ) NO. RC462113652G95.

WE DISMISS THE PROTEST.

THE PROTESTER CONTENDS THAT THE SOLICITED PARTS SHOULD BE PROCURED FROM WORTHINGTON, THE ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER, ON A SOLE-SOURCE BASIS BECAUSE ONLY ITS PART WILL ENSURE PROPER PERFORMANCE OF THE REPAIRED EQUIPMENT.

REGARDING THE CONTENTION THAT THE SOLICITATION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT, SECTION 21.1(B)(1) OF OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES, 4 C.F.R. PART 21 (1981), REQUIRES THAT A PROTEST ALLEGING AN IMPROPRIETY APPARENT FROM AN RFQ BE FILED PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF QUOTATIONS. THE NAVY INFORMALLY ADVISES THAT WORTHINGTON SUBMITTED A QUOTATION IN RESPONSE TO THIS RFQ, AND WORTHINGTON'S LETTER OF PROTEST WAS NOT FILED UNTIL AFTER IT WAS ADVISED BY THE NAVY OF THE AWARD TO RAM. THUS, SINCE WORTHINGTON'S PROTEST WAS FILED AFTER THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF QUOTATIONS, IT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

WE ALSO POINT OUT WITH REGARD TO WORTHINGTON'S CONTENTION THAT ONLY WORTHINGTON CAN SUPPLY THE REQUIRED PART THAT, IN VIEW OF THE OBJECTIVE OF OUR BID PROTEST FUNCTION TO INSURE FULL AND FREE COMPETITION FOR GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS, AS A GENERAL MATTER, OUR OFFICE WILL NOT REVIEW A PROTEST THAT AN AGENCY SHOULD PROCURE AN ITEM FROM A PARTICULAR FIRM ON A SOLE-SOURCE BASIS. INGERSOLL-RAND, B-206066, FEBRUARY 3, 1982, 82-1 CPD 83; INGERSOLL-RAND COMPANY, B-203727, JULY 2, 1981, 81-2 CPD 6.

WE DISMISS THE PROTEST. .FOOT:

GAO Contacts