Sprint Communications Company LP; Global Crossing, B-288413.11; B-288413.12, October 8, 2002

Sprint Communications Company LP; Global Crossing, B-288413.11; B-288413.12, October 8, 2002 TITLE: Sprint Communications Company LP; Global Crossing, B-288413.11; B-288413.12, October 8, 2002 BNUMBER: B-288413.11; B-288413.12 DATE: October 8, 2002 ********************************************************************** Sprint Communications Company LP; Global Crossing, B-288413.11; B-288413.12, October 8, 2002 Decision Matter of: Sprint Communications Company LP; Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc.--Protests and Reconsideration File: B-288413.11; B-288413.12 Date: October 8, 2002 David S. Cohen, Esq., and John J. O'Brien, Esq., Cohen Mohr, for Sprint Communications Company LP, and John G. Horan, Esq., and Jason A. Carey, Esq., McDermott, Will & Emery, for Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc., the protesters. Carl L. Vacketta, Esq., Kevin P. Mullen, Esq., and David E. Fletcher, Esq., Piper Rudnick, for MCI WorldCom Communications, Inc., an intervenor. William L. Mayers, Esq., Department of Defense, for the agency. Henry J. Gorczycki, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protests alleging material misrepresentation of an offeror's financial information submitted to the agency for the purposes of determining the offeror's responsibility is dismissed where the totality of circumstances make it inappropriate for the General Accounting Office to review this matter. DECISION Sprint Communications Company LP and Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. protest an award to MCI WorldCom Communications, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. DCA200-01-R-5008, issued by the Department of Defense, Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization (DITCO), for the Defense Research Engineering Network (DREN). Global Crossing alternatively requests reconsideration of our decision, Global Crossing Telecomms., Inc., B‑288413.6, B‑288413.10, June 18, 2002, 2002 CPD P: 102, in which we denied Global Crossing's earlier protest of the award to MCI. The protesters allege that the agency relied upon a material misrepresentation by the awardee in making award. We dismiss the protests and the request for reconsideration. The agency awarded a contract to MCI on April 4, 2002. In the months prior to that award, the agency had twice selected Global Crossing's proposal for award. The first selection resulted in a contract award that was canceled following protests by competitors, including Sprint and MCI. Upon reevaluation, the agency again selected Global Crossing for award and, based on a pre-award survey, determined that the firm was responsible. However, at the request of Global Crossing, the agency delayed the award, and soon thereafter Global Crossing announced that it was filing for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Act. The agency updated its pre-award survey to consider Global Crossing's most recent financial conditions, and subsequently determined that the firm was nonresponsible.[1] The agency also performed a pre-award survey on MCI, whose proposal was considered next in line for award. MCI asked the agency to rely on the financial position of the firm's parent corporation, WorldCom, Inc. Following submission of a corporate guarantee by WorldCom, the agency consented to MCI's request and conducted the pre-award survey, based on WorldCom's financial statements for the previous 3 years. The pre-award survey determined that WorldCom's financial data indicated that the firm had satisfactory financial performance, generally favorable trends of key financial indicators, and a very unlikely chance of bankruptcy, which did not expose the Government to significant risks in issuing a contract to MCI with WorldCom serving as guarantor. In determining MCI responsible, the contracting officer determined, based on the information submitted by WorldCom, that the firm had adequate capacity to meet financial commitments, though it may be subject to adverse economic conditions. The protests of Global Crossing, Sprint and another firm that followed the award to MCI challenged in part the agency's responsibility determination. After receiving a report from the agency addressing all of the protest allegations, Sprint and the other firm withdrew their protests. Global Crossing's protest was limited to challenging the agency's responsibility determination concerning Global Crossing and alleging that the agency treated the firms unequally in analyzing their financial information in determining responsibility. In denying Global Crossing's protest on June 18, we reviewed the agency's pre-award surveys of both firms. The record reasonably supported the agency's determination of nonresponsibility for Global Crossing.