B-299370, James C. Trump, February 20, 2007

B-299370 Feb 20, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights James C. Trump, the agency tender official (ATO) for the Naval Satellite Operations Center (NAVSOC) tender in a public-private competition under Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76, protests the Navy's decision to procure operations and maintenance services for communications satellite systems at Point Mugu, California and various NAVSOC detachments, through a contract awarded to Rome Research Corporation, rather than continuing to have those services performed in-house by government employees. On behalf of the employees, the ATO argues that the A-76 competition contained various flaws. We dismiss the protest on the basis that the protestor is not an interested party. View Decision B-299370, James C. Trump, February 20, 2007 Decision Matter of: James C. Trump File: B-299370 Date: February 20, 2007 Andre Long, Esq., Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, for the protester. Robert E. Little, Esq., Naval Facilities Engineering Command, for the agency. Daniel B. Abrahams, Esq., Michael D. Maloney, Esq., and Howard A. Wolf-Rodda, Esq., Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., for Rome Research Corporation, an intervenor. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protester serving as agency tender official, who filed protest on behalf of federal employees challenging the outcome of a public-private competition under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, is not an interested party with standing to pursue a protest at the Government Accountability Office where the public-private competition at issue was initiated prior to January 26, 2005. DECISION James C. Trump, the agency tender official (ATO) for the Naval Satellite Operations Center (NAVSOC) tender in a public-private competition under Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76, protests the Navy's decision to procure operations and maintenance services for communications satellite systems at Point Mugu, California and various NAVSOC detachments, through a contract awarded to Rome Research Corporation, rather than continuing to have those services performed in-house by government employees. On behalf of the employees,[1] the ATO argues that the A'76 competition contained various flaws. We dismiss the protest on the basis that the protester is not an interested party. On January 11, 2005, the Navy published an announcement on the federal business opportunities (FedBizOpps) Internet website, publicizing the Navy's intent to conduct a standard competition to compare the cost of continued in-house performance of the requirements at issue with obtaining those services by contract. Among other things, the January 11 notice stated, –this notice represents the formal public announcement and official start date of a public-private competition of the [NAVSOC].— Thereafter, the Navy issued an RFP and the ATO submitted the agency tender on behalf of the government's most efficient organization (MEO), followed by discussions and the Navy's evaluation of the competing submissions. On January 4, 2007, the Navy announced its decision to obtain the services from Rome Research, and provided a debriefing to the ATO on that date. Under the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, Pub. L. No. 108-375, sect. 326(a)(2), 118 Stat. 1811, 1848 (2004), codified at 31 U.S.C. sect. 3551 (Supp. IV 2004), the definition of an interested party eligible to file a protest was amended to include –the official responsible for submitting the Federal agency tender in a public-private competition conducted under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 regarding an activity or function of a Federal agency performed by more than 65 full-time equivalent employees of the Federal agency.— However, the amended statute also provided: (d) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to protests . . . that relate to studies initiated under Office of Management and Budget Circular A--76 on or after the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act. Pub. L. No. 108-375, sect. 326(d). The –date of the enactment of this Act— was October 28, 2004, when the Act was signed by the President. On April 14, 2005, following public notice and an opportunity to comment, our Office amended our Bid Protest Regulations to conform to the Act, adding an ATO to the definition of an interested party. In so doing, we noted that the amendments were applicable to protests regarding A-76 competitions that are initiated more than 90 days after enactment of the Act--that is, on or after January 26, 2005. Specifically, we stated: Protests filed at GAO . . .