Systems Research and Applications Corporation; Infotec

Systems Research and Applications Corporation; Infotec BNUMBER: B-270708; B-270708.2; B-270708.3 DATE: April 15, 1996 TITLE: Systems Research and Applications Corporation; Infotec Development, Incorporated ********************************************************************** Matter of:Systems Research and Applications Corporation; Infotec Development, Incorporated File: B-270708; B-270708.2; B-270708.3 Date:April 15, 1996 Alfred M. Wurglitz, Esq., Lisa H. Marino, Esq., Matthew B. Pachman, Esq., and Michael K. Powell, Esq., O'Melveny & Myers, for Systems Research and Applications Corp.; Charles A. Patrizia, Esq., and Sarah M. McWilliams, Esq., Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, for Infotec Development, Inc., the protesters. William A. Roberts III, Esq., Lee P. Curtis, Esq., Brian A. Darst, Esq., and Gayle R. Girod, Esq., Howrey & Simon, for Cordant, Inc., an intervenor. Richard P. Castiglia, Jr., Esq., Department of the Air Force, and John Klein, Esq., Small Business Administration, for the agencies. Peter A. Iannicelli, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Contracting officer properly awarded a contract more than 10 working days after the Small Business Administration (SBA) received a size status protest against the prospective awardee where the SBA did not issue a decision on the protest within the 10-day time period prescribed in the Federal Acquisition Regulation and in the SBA's regulations, even though a government furlough that affected SBA personnel contributed to the delay. DECISION Systems Research and Applications Corporation (SRA) and Infotec Development, Inc. protest the award of a contract to Cordant, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. F19628-94-R-0016, which was set aside for exclusive small business participation. The protesters contend that Cordant was ineligible for contract award because the Small Business Administration (SBA) determined that Cordant was other than a small business offeror for purposes of this procurement. We deny the protests. Issued on November 14, 1994, the RFP sought proposals for providing the Defense intelligence community with the capability to accomplish requirements analysis, engineering design, and integration services for off-the-shelf commercial hardware and software in support of the Air Force's Integration for Command, Control, Communication, Computers, and Intelligence (IC4I) Program. The RFP contemplated award of two indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts to two different offerors; each contract would be for a base period of 2 years with options for 3 additional years.[1] The RFP was intended to provide the systems for intercommunication among the different IC4I functions and their underlying information systems to handle, process, share, and disseminate intelligence data. Among other things, the RFP contemplated that delivery orders would be issued to the contractors for various engineering services and is intended to provide the intelligence community with new systems and upgrades as new technologies become available. Initial proposals were received in January 1995 and, after evaluation, four were included in the competitive range.[2] After discussions were held and best and final offers received and evaluated, the Air Force notified offerors on October 31 that it had selected BTG and Cordant for award. On November 7, Infotec, the incumbent contractor, filed a protest with the contracting officer asserting that Cordant was other than a small business for purposes of this procurement and therefore ineligible for award.[3] The contracting officer referred the matter to the SBA for a size status determination. On December 1, before receiving the SBA's written determination on Cordant's size, the Air Force awarded a contract to Cordant. On December 5, the SBA issued a written determination that Cordant was other than small for purposes of this procurement. SRA was debriefed by the Air Force on December 7. Shortly thereafter, SRA and Infotec filed protests in our Office. Performance under the contract has been held in abeyance pending resolution of the protests. The crux of the protests is that Cordant was ineligible for award because Cordant was not a small business for purposes of this procurement. The protesters allege that the contracting officer awarded the contract to Cordant after the SBA decided, and notified the contracting officer, that Cordant was not an eligible small business offeror. Therefore, the protesters argue that the Air Force should terminate Cordant's contract.