Comint Systems Corporation

Comint Systems Corporation BNUMBER: B-274853; B-274853.2 DATE: January 8, 1997 TITLE: Comint Systems Corporation ********************************************************************** Matter of:Comint Systems Corporation File: B-274853; B-274853.2 Date:January 8, 1997 Philip F. Hudock, Esq., for the protester. Andrew N. Cook, Esq., and Joel S. Rubinstein, Esq., Bell, Boyd & Lloyd, for Digital Support Corporation, an intervenor. Kenneth A. Lechter, Esq., Department of Commerce, for the agency. Denise A. Benjamin, Esq., and David R. Kohler, Esq., for the Small Business Administration. Tania L. Calhoun, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest is sustained where contracting agency's letter offering requirement to Small Business Administration (SBA) for acceptance into 8(a) program failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to provide SBA with complete and accurate information regarding the proposed offering, to the protester's prejudice. 2. Protest is sustained where contracting agency's letter offering requirement to Small Business Administration for acceptance into 8(a) program supported its request for a sole source award to a firm other than protester by estimating the anticipated award price to be below the threshold above which a competitive acquisition must generally be conducted; this estimated award price was unreasonably calculated; and a reasonable calculation yields an estimated award price in excess of the competitive acquisition threshold. DECISION Comint Systems Corporation (Comint) protests the decision of the Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), and the Small Business Administration (SBA) to place the work encompassed by its microcomputer hardware maintenance services contract with PTO under SBA's section 8(a) program for award of a sole source contract to Digital Support Corporation. Comint argues that PTO violated the applicable regulations in offering these requirements to SBA. We sustain the protests. PTO has a long-term strategy to consolidate existing contracts and establish fewer sources of supply for microcomputer-based office automation and support services. Consistent with that strategy, the agency's February 1996 requirements initiative set forth a plan to establish a consolidated interim contract for hardware and software maintenance and a consolidated interim contract for office automation support services. These interim contracts would be followed by a consolidated multi-year contract for all such services. The interim contract for hardware and software maintenance is at issue here. At the time the requirements initiative was finalized, Digital was performing its third and final year of a section 8(a) contract with PTO for the provision of microcomputer maintenance services, as well as related software maintenance services. The 1993 contract stated that there were approximately 4,700 combined units of microcomputer hardware installed throughout PTO, but estimated that more than 7,650 units might be installed by the end of the contract's term. PTO states that Digital was maintaining approximately 10,000 units of equipment in its final contract year, at a price of approximately $1.7 million. At this same time, Comint, a section 8(a) firm, was providing PTO with hardware maintenance services under the first year of a non-section 8(a) contract.[1] PTO states that Comint's contract required the firm to maintain 70 units of hardware at a price of approximately $64,000. Each contract was administered by a separate office within PTO. Pursuant to the requirements initiative, the contracting officers' technical representatives for each contract discussed the possible consolidation of their requirements. To arrive at the requirement which was eventually offered to SBA, the contracting officer for Digital's contract--who also served as the contracting officer for this interim contract--added the requirements encompassed by Comint's contract to those encompassed by Digital's contract. The consolidated contract also included maintenance requirements necessitated by PTO's acquisition of additional equipment, as well as requirements that had been previously performed by agency employees. By letter dated April 2, the contracting officer offered the consolidated requirement to the Small Business Administration (SBA) under the section 8(a) program. The letter described the requirement as being for hardware and software maintenance services, with a term of 1 year, and stated that it was a "follow-on" to Digital's prior contract.