Ervin and Associates, Inc., B-278849, March 23, 1998

B-278849 Mar 23, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protest that agency failed to mail a copy of the solicitation and its amendments to the protester despite its request to be placed on the source list is denied where the contract specialist states that he included the protester on the source list and followed procedures that should have resulted in the protester's receipt of the documents. Ervin learned from a press account that HUD was planning a new procurement of these services. Ervin asked the Director of the Program Support Division in HUD's Office of Procurement and Contracts to put the firm on the source list to receive a copy of the solicitation when it was issued. The procurement was synopsized in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) on July 21. View Decision Matter of: Ervin and Associates, Inc. File: B-278849 Date: March 23, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Ervin and Associates, Inc. protests any award under request for proposals (RFP) No. DU100C000018593, issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to obtain comprehensive financial analytical services. Ervin contends that HUD intentionally excluded it from the competition by failing to provide it with a copy of the solicitation. We deny the protest. In May 1997, Ervin learned from a press account that HUD was planning a new procurement of these services. By letter sent by facsimile on June 27, Ervin asked the Director of the Program Support Division in HUD's Office of Procurement and Contracts to put the firm on the source list to receive a copy of the solicitation when it was issued. One month later, the Director gave the letter to the contract specialist. The letter's cover sheet bore the Director's handwritten note asking the contract specialist to place Ervin on the source list for this solicitation. The contract specialist states that he typed Ervin's name and address into the computerized source list. This list would later generate printed labels for use on envelopes containing copies of the solicitation and its amendments. The contract specialist states, and the record confirms, that Ervin's correct name and address appear on the source list, along with the names and addresses of 69 other firms. The procurement was synopsized in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) on July 21. The notice advised prospective offerors that the RFP would be issued on or about August 4. Firms could submit a written request for a copy of the solicitation to the contract specialist, whose name and address was provided, or firms could download the solicitation and any amendments from HUD's Internet Home Page, whose address was also provided. On August 25, the contract specialist states that he made copies of the solicitation; printed out labels for each firm on the source list, including Ervin; placed copies of the solicitation in individual envelopes; and attached the labels to the envelopes. He further states that he printed his office's mail code below the return address in the upper lefthand corner of each envelope so that any undelivered envelopes would be returned directly to his office. He delivered the 70 labeled envelopes containing the solicitation to HUD's mail room, and states that they were sent out by U.S. mail. He also forwarded an electronic copy of the RFP for placement on HUD's Internet Home Page where it could be downloaded and printed by interested firms. The solicitation established September 22 as the anticipated due date for receipt of proposals. Solicitation amendment No. 0001, issued September 16, extended the closing date for receipt of proposals to October 6. Amendment No. 0002, issued October 1, extended the closing date to October 14. Amendment No. 0003, issued October 7, made no change to the closing date. The contract specialist states that, for each amendment, he made copies; printed labels for each firm on the source list, including Ervin; placed the copies in envelopes; affixed the mailing labels; printed the mail code on the envelopes; and delivered the envelopes to the mail room where they were sent out by U.S. mail. As with the solicitation, he forwarded an electronic copy of each amendment for posting on HUD's Internet Home Page. Ervin was not one of the 11 firms submitting proposals by the October 14 closing date. On November 3, Ervin filed an agency-level protest arguing that HUD had "purposely and illegally sought to exclude Ervin from the competition" by intentionally ignoring its request to be placed on the source list, thereby failing to provide Ervin a copy of the solicitation. After HUD's December 3 denial of the agency-level protest, Ervin filed essentially the same protest in our Office. Under the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, agencies are generally required to obtain full and open competition through the use of competitive procedures when procuring property or services. 41 U.S.C. Sec. 253(a)(1)(A) (1994).