American Material Handling, Inc., B-281556, February 24, 1999

B-281556 Feb 24, 1999 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Agency's loss of a quote received through the Federal Acquisition Computer Network due to a computer malfunction does not provide a basis to sustain the protest where the loss was an isolated error. Was not part of a deliberate effort to exclude the protester from the competition or the result of the agency's failure to have adequate procedures in place for the receipt and safeguarding of quotes. The procurement was solicited under simplified acquisition procedures through the Federal Acquisition Computer Network (FACNET). /1/ We deny the protest. Which is a computer/communications system performing a variety of data management functions. The information is transmitted through a network entry point to Value-Added-Networks (VAN). View Decision Matter of: American Material Handling, Inc. File: B-281556 Date: February 24, 1999 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION American Material Handling, Inc. protests the award of a contract to R&R Limited under request for quotations (RFQ) No. F04684-98-Q-S178, issued by the Department of the Air Force for a 40-foot articulating boom lift. The procurement was solicited under simplified acquisition procedures through the Federal Acquisition Computer Network (FACNET). /1/ We deny the protest. The Air Force issued the RFQ through the FACNET on August 27, 1998. Soliciting through FACNET requires electronically transmitting the solicitation from a computer terminal to a government gateway, which is a computer/communications system performing a variety of data management functions. After processing by the gateway, the information is transmitted through a network entry point to Value-Added-Networks (VAN), which are private sector entities that provide the electronic procurement information to businesses that have registered to contract with the government through the FACNET. Any electronic commerce, such as the submission of a quote, requires these businesses to access the same process in reverse order. S.D.M. Supply, Inc., supra, at 2. Here, the RFQ was transmitted from Vandenburg Air Force Base (AFB) through the government gateway at Hill AFB with a stated due date for quotes of September 4. American asserts that it transmitted a quote priced at $51,731 for the boom lift in response to the RFQ on September 4. In support of this assertion, American has submitted a copy of the quote it claims to have submitted with a September 4 date on it. American explains that the copy of the quote was returned by its VAN, and that the date was automatically recorded on the copied quote when it was transmitted through the FACNET. According to the Air Force, their computer system at Vandenburg AFB reserved for the receipt of quotes malfunctioned on September 4, and they were unable to retrieve any quotes that may have been submitted on that date. /2/ In view of this problem, the Air Force retransmitted the RFQ on September 17, with a revised due date for quotes of September 21. The agency also intended to transmit with the reissued RFQ a note stating as follows: "Our computer system crashed and all bid offers were lost. Please submit your bid no later than 21 September 98." Agency Report, Tab 5, Buyer's Note, Sept. 16, 1998. However, during the course of this protest it was discovered by the agency that the note erroneously "stayed within the Government computer system," and was not transmitted over the FACNET. Agency Memorandum of February 5, 1999. The protester explains that it did not submit a second quote upon seeing only the retransmission of the RFQ because the protester assumed that its quote was properly submitted, and was unaware from the retransmission itself that its quote had been lost due to a malfunction in the Air Force's computer system. On September 21, the Air Force received a quote in response to the retransmitted RFQ from R&R at a price of $52,040. No other quotes were received, and a purchase order was issued to R&R on September 29. /3/ American asserts that it is being unfairly "penalized for [the agency's] computer failure," and argues that it should have received the purchase order. Protest at 2. When using simplified acquisition procedures, agencies must promote competition "to the maximum extent practicable." 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2304(g)(3) (1994). In meeting this requirement, agencies must make reasonable efforts, consistent with efficiency and economy, to afford all eligible and interested vendors an opportunity to compete. S.D.M. Supply, Inc., supra, at 4. Agencies have a fundamental obligation to have procedures in place not only to receive quotations, but also to reasonably safeguard quotations received and to give them fair consideration. Id.