TITLE:  Triton Electronic Enterprises, Inc., B-294221; B-294248; B-294249, July 9, 2004
BNUMBER:  B-294221; B-294248; B-294249
DATE:  July 9, 2004
**********************************************************************
   Decision

    

    

   Matter of:   Triton Electronic Enterprises, Inc.

    

   File:            B-294221; B-294248; B-294249

    

   Date:              July 9, 2004

    

   Debe Sharp, Triton Electronic Enterprises, Inc., for the protester.

   Lori S. Chofnas, Esq., Department of the Navy; Glynis L. Bell, Esq.,
General Services Administration; and Robert E. Sebold, Esq., Defense
Logistics Agency, for the agencies.

   Katherine I. Riback, Esq., and David A. Ashen, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.

   DIGEST

    

   General Accounting Office, under its bid protest function, does not review
protests that an agency improperly proposed a contractor for debarment, as
the contracting agency is the appropriate forum for suspension and
debarment disputes.

   DECISION

    

   Triton Electronic Enterprises, Inc. protests the failure of the General
Services Administration, the Defense Logistics Agency, and the Department
of the Navy to set aside certain procurements under the Small Business
Administration's 8(a) contracting program. 15 U.S.C. S 637(a)(2000).
    

   We dismiss the protest on the basis that Triton is a proposed debarred
contractor, and thus is not an interested party to challenge a procurement
decision.

    

   Under the bid protest provisions of the Competition in Contracting Act of
1984, 31A U.S.C. ASAS 3551-3556 (2000), only an "interested party" may
protest a federal procurement.A  That is, a protester must be an actual or
prospective bidder or offeror whose direct economic interest would be
affected by the award of a contract or the failure to award a contract.A 
Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. ASA 21.0(a) (2004).A  Since a proposed
debarred contractor generally is not eligible for the award of a federal
contract, Federal Acquisition Regulation AS 9.405(a), such a protester
would not be in line for contract award even if its protest were
sustained.A  See Pacrak, Inc., Ba**236798, Nov. 7, 1989, 89-2 CPD PA 442
at 1.  Therefore, we will not consider a protest from a proposed debarred
bidder or offeror. 

    

   Further, to the extent that Triton challenges the proposed debarment, we
note that the General Accounting Office will not review a protest that an
agency improperly proposed a contractor for debarment, as the contracting
agency is the appropriate forum for debarment disputes.  See Shinwha
Electronics, B-290603 et al., Sept. 3, 2002, 2002 CPD P 154 at 5. 

    

   In the event that the proposed debarment is lifted, and Triton again
becomes eligible for award, Triton may request that its protest files be
reopened, provided such request is made in a timely fashion.  Meyer and
Lillian Blinder--Recon., B-238783.2, June 26, 1990, 90-1 CPD P 594 at 1.

    

   Anthony H. Gamboa
General Counsel