MAC's General Contractor, B-276755, July 24, 1997

B-276755 Published: Jul 24, 1997. Publicly Released: Jul 24, 1997. Jump To HIGHLIGHTS VIEW DECISION Highlights A firm protested the Naval Facilities Engineering Command's (NAVFAC) issuance of an order for interior renovations and painting services, contending that NAVFAC should not have considered its termination for default under a prior contract as a basis for selecting a higher-priced bidder for award. GAO held that: (1) NAVFAC had a reasonable basis to be concerned about the protester's past performance even though the protester appealed the decision upholding the default; (2) the solicitation specifically advised bidders that there would be no public bid opening and no exposure of prices and that NAVFAC would consider past performance in its selection decision; (3) there was no evidence that NAVFAC's evaluation was improper; and (4) the protester untimely filed two additional protests more than 10 days after the bases of the protests were known. Accordingly, the protest was denied. View Decision B-220680.3, JUN 3, 1986, 65 COMP.GEN. 619 CONTRACTS - PROTESTS - INTERESTED PARTY REQUIREMENT - PROTESTER NOT IN LINE FOR AWARD A PARTY THAT SUBMITS LATE STEP 1 PROPOSAL IS NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY TO PROTEST THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS OR ANY CHANGES IN THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SOLICITATION THAT OCCUR DURING OR AFTER PROPOSAL EVALUATION WHEN THOSE ISSUES ONLY AFFECT THE PARTIES TO THE COMPETITION. MATTER OF: FLIGHT RESOURCES INC., JUNE 3, 1986: FLIGHT RESOURCES INC., PROTESTS SOLICITATION NO. DTFA15-85-R-10011, ISSUED BY THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA), DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, TO OBTAIN PROPOSALS FOR THE OPERATION OF A GENERAL AVIATION SERVICE FACILITY AT WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT. THE PROCUREMENT WAS CONDUCTED UNDER TWO-STEP SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES. /1/ FLIGHT RESOURCES CONTENDS THAT THE PROCUREMENT WAS DEFECTIVE BECAUSE THE STEP 1 NEGOTIATIONS RESULTED IN SUCH SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE AGENCY'S REQUIREMENT THAT THE PROCUREMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLICITED WITH ALL POTENTIAL OFFERORS, INCLUDING FLIGHT RESOURCES, INVITED TO COMPETE. WE DISMISS THE PROTEST. THIS PROTEST IS FLIGHT RESOURCES' THIRD ATTEMPT, AFTER FAILING TO SUBMIT A TIMELY STEP 1 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, TO COMPETE FOR AWARD UNDER THIS SOLICITATION. THE PROPOSAL DUE DATE WAS SEPTEMBER 5, 1985; THE FIRM'S PROPOSAL WAS NOT SUBMITTED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 20, AND IT WAS THEREAFTER RETURNED BECAUSE IT WAS LATE. FLIGHT RESOURCES' INITIAL PROTEST TO THE AGENCY, ALLEGING THAT THE AGENCY SHOULD HAVE EXTENDED THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS, WAS DISMISSED AS UNTIMELY. ITS SUBSEQUENT PROTEST TO THIS OFFICE WAS ALSO DISMISSED AS UNTIMELY BECAUSE THE PROTEST TO THE AGENCY DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE TIME LIMITS OF OUR BID PROTEST REGULATIONS, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.2(A)(3) (1985). FLIGHT RESOURCES, INC., B-220680, OCT. 25, 1985, 85-2 CPD PARA. 467. A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RESULTED IN AFFIRMANCE OF THE DISMISSAL. FLIGHT RESOURCES, INC., B-220680.2, NOV. 12, 1985. ALTHOUGH THIS CURRENT PROTEST INITIALLY INCLUDED SEVERAL GROUNDS OF PROTEST, FLIGHT RESOURCES HAS WITHDRAWN CERTAIN ISSUES, LEAVING FOR RESOLUTION A CHALLENGE TO FLIGHT RESOURCES' STATUS AS AN INTERESTED PARTY, AND THE PROTESTER'S ALLEGATION THAT THE STEP 1 NEGOTIATIONS HAD SO CHANGED THE REQUIREMENTS THAT A NEW SOLICITATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED. UNDER OUR BID PROTEST REGULATIONS, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.1(E), ONLY AN "INTERESTED PARTY" MAY PROTEST TO OUR OFFICE. WHETHER A PARTY IS SUFFICIENTLY INTERESTED DEPENDS ON THE PARTY'S STATUS IN RELATION TO THE PROCUREMENT AND THE ISSUES INVOLVED AND HOW THESE CIRCUMSTANCES SHOW THE EXISTENCE OF A DIRECT OR A SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC INTEREST ON THE PART OF THE PROTESTER. NEFF INSTRUMENT CORP., B-216236, DEC. 11, 1984, 84-2 CPD PARA. 649. A PARTY THAT WOULD NOT BE IN LINE FOR AWARD IF ITS PROTEST IS SUSTAINED IS GENERALLY NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY. ZINGER CONSTR. CO., INC., B-220203, OCT. 31, 1985, 85-2 CPD PARA. 493. IN SOME CASES, IF THE REMEDY SOUGHT IS NOT AWARD UNDER THE PROTESTED SOLICITATION, BUT CANCELLATION AND RESOLICITATION OF THE REQUIREMENT AND THE PROTESTER IS A POTENTIAL COMPETITOR ON THE NEW SOLICITATION, THE PROTESTER HAS THE NECESSARY DIRECT INTEREST TO BE AN INTERESTED PARTY, TRACOR JITCO, INC., B-220139, DEC. 24, 1985, 85-2 CPD PARA. 710. HOWEVER, A PROTESTER DOES NOT BECOME "INTERESTED" MERELY BY SEEKING CANCELLATION AND RESOLICITATION.