A firm protested the Defense Industrial Supply Center's award of 21 purchase order contracts, contending that, although it was the low offerer under each solicitation, it did not receive the awards. The protester also contended that it submitted timely quotations under all of the procurements. However, agency records showed that it did not receive quotations from the protester on 11 procurements; the protest under these procurements was denied because the protester failed to prove the timely submission of its quotations or improper Government action. Furthermore, GAO will not disturb a small purchase award on such a basis absent evidence of a conscious or deliberate effort to prevent the selection of the protester. Because the protester had received a number of awards from the agency, GAO found that it was not being deliberately excluded from competition. The agency stated that the protester did not receive award on nine other procurements because it failed to submit required data. The tenth procurement was awarded to another firm which submitted the low quotation. The protester contended that the required data which it failed to submit unnecessarily restricted competition. However, GAO found that this contention was untimely since it was not filed until after the closing dates for the receipt of quotations. However, since the protester failed to offer any proof that the items being procured were not critical parts that must be restricted, this aspect of the protest was dismissed. The protester's final argument concerning the last contract award was denied because the protester was not the low offerer. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.
Skip to Highlights