Matter of: MS Industries File: B-250496; B-250501; B-250504 Date: November 2, 1992
Highlights
PROCUREMENT Bid Protests Dismissal Protest of agency's failure to answer protester's questions about request for quotations is dismissed for failure to state a legally sufficient basis where protester has not explained what information it was seeking or why this information was necessary for the preparation of a quotation. The date set for receipt of quotations under RFQ No. -N471 was September 26. Quotations under RFQ Nos. -N622 and -N618 were due by September 27. Stating that she was required to answer such questions in writing and provide the answers to all other prospective offerors. Alleging that the contracting officer's refusal to provide the requested information was an attempt to keep RMS from submitting quotations.
Matter of: MS Industries File: B-250496; B-250501; B-250504 Date: November 2, 1992
PROCUREMENT Bid Protests Dismissal Protest of agency's failure to answer protester's questions about request for quotations is dismissed for failure to state a legally sufficient basis where protester has not explained what information it was seeking or why this information was necessary for the preparation of a quotation.
Attorneys
DECISION RMS Industries protests the agency's failure to address its questions about requests for quotations (RFQ) Nos. DLA400 92-T-N622, - N471, and -N618, issued by the Defense General Supply Center.
We dismiss the protests.
The date set for receipt of quotations under RFQ No. -N471 was September 26, 1992; quotations under RFQ Nos. -N622 and -N618 were due by September 27, 1992. On September 21, RMS telephoned the contracting officer to request information about the item descriptions in the solicitations. The contracting officer allegedly refused to provide the information over the phone, stating that she was required to answer such questions in writing and provide the answers to all other prospective offerors. RMS then asked the contracting officer to send the information by telefacsimile in view of the impending closing dates. According to RMS, the contracting officer refused to do so. RMS filed these protests on September 24, alleging that the contracting officer's refusal to provide the requested information was an attempt to keep RMS from submitting quotations.
Our Bid Protest Regulations provide that a protest shall include a detailed statement of the legal and factual grounds of protest, 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.1(c)(4) (1992), and that the grounds stat Sec. 21.1(e). This requirement contemplates that protesters will provide, at a minimum, either allegations or evidence sufficient, if uncontradicted, to establish the likelihood of the protester's claim of improper agency action. Professional Med. Prods., Inc., B-231743, July 1, 1988, 88-2 CPD Para. 2. RMS has not met this standard, as it has not stated what information it was seeking or why this information was necessary for RMS to prepare its quotation. Without details as to the nature of the requested information, we have no basis to conclude that the contracting officer's refusal to furnish the information might have been improper such that our initial consideration of the matter (in the form of a request for a report from the contracting agency) is warranted. See Cajar Defense Support Co.-- Recon., B-240477.2, Sept. 14, 1990, 90-2 CPD Para. 215.
The protests are dismissed.