TITLE: B-310928, Data Integrators, Inc., January 31, 2008
BNUMBER: B-310928
DATE: January 31, 2008
**************************************************
B-310928, Data Integrators, Inc., January 31, 2008

   Decision

   Matter of: Data Integrators, Inc.

   File: B-310928

   Date: January 31, 2008

   Robert Denton for the protester.

   Julie Kelley Cannatti, Esq., and Roy E. Potter, Esq., Government Printing
   Office, for the agency.

   Frank Maguire, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General
   Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.

   DIGEST

   Protest that agency improperly issued purchase order to vendor whose
   quotation was received after the deadline for submission of quotations is
   sustained, where solicitation incorporated by reference late quotation
   provision expressly providing that quotations must be received by deadline
   to be considered.

   DECISION

   Data Integrators, Inc. protests issuance of a purchase order to The Data
   Center, Inc. (TDC) under Government Printing Office (GPO) Quotation
   Request for Jackets 740-264 and 740-268, for printing of "2008 General
   Enrollment Package (English)" and "2008 General Enrollment Package
   (Spanish)," respectively, for the Department of Health and Human Services.

   We sustain the protest.

   The solicitation, dated November 30, 2007, included the instruction
   "Quotations are Due By: (Eastern Time) 10:00 AM on 12/04/07." Agency
   Report (AR), Tab B. Data Integrators submitted a quotation prior to 10
   a.m. on December 4. Protest at 1; AR at 2.[1] On December 4, at 10:41
   a.m., GPO prepared an abstract of quotations that indicated that two
   quotations had been received, and that Data Integrators' was the
   lowest-priced. AR, Tab D. GPO informed Data Integrators that its quotation
   was low and, at 11:29 a.m., e-mailed a copy of GPO's data use agreement to
   the firm and asked that it be completed and returned. Protest at 1; AR,
   Tab E. That same day, at 2 p.m., GPO received a quotation from TDC. AR,
   Tab F. GPO then prepared another abstract, which indicated that TDC's
   quotation was low. AR, Tab G. At 2:19 p.m., Data Integrators returned the
   completed data use agreement via e-mail. AR, Tab H. At 3:08 p.m., the
   agency advised Data Integrators by e-mail that it had received additional
   quotations that would be considered. AR, Tab I. Later that day, GPO issued
   a purchase order to TDC based on its low price. AR, Tab K.

   Data Integrators asserts that issuance of the purchase order to TDC was
   improper, since TDC's quotation was not received until after the
   established deadline for receipt of quotations. Data Integrators complains
   that it was "at a distinct disadvantage" vis-`a-vis TDC, since submitting
   its quotation after the deadline gave TDC more time to "get better pricing
   and terms." Protest at 2.

   GPO responds that acceptance of the late quotation was proper based on
   decisions of our Office setting forth the principle that solicitation
   language requesting quotations by a certain time does not establish a firm
   closing time for receipt of quotations. AR at 2; see, e.g., Instruments &
   Controls Serv. Co., B-222122, June 30, 1986, 86-2 CPD para. 16 at 3.

   Acceptance of the late quotation was improper. GPO is correct that
   solicitation language setting a certain date and time for submission of
   quotations generally does not establish a firm deadline for receipt of
   quotations. However, where the solicitation contains a late submission
   provision expressly providing that quotations must be received by the
   stated deadline in order to be considered, quotations cannot be considered
   if received after the deadline. See M.Braun, Inc., B-298935.2, May 21,
   2007, 2007 CPD para. 96; DataVault Corp., B-248664, Sept. 10, 1992, 92-2
   CPD para. 166 at 2; Instruments & Controls Serv. Co., supra.

   Here, the solicitation stated that "GPO Contract Terms (GPO Pub. 310.2,
   effective December 1, 1987 (Rev. 6-01)) applies." AR, Tab B. The
   referenced GPO contract terms, in section 7(a) under "Solicitation
   Provisions," included a late submission provision providing that any bid
   "received ... after the exact time specified for receipt will not be
   considered" (except under specified exceptions not applicable here). This
   is precisely the type of provision that we have held precludes an agency
   from accepting a quotation submitted after the stated deadline. Although
   section 7 refers to "bids," it is clear from GPO's incorporation of this
   provision in the solicitation that it was intended to apply to the
   quotations received here. We conclude that, since TDC's quotation was
   received after the deadline set forth in the solicitation, it could not be
   accepted; issuance of the purchase order to TDC therefore was improper.
   See M.Braun, Inc., supra.

   On December 13, 2007, GPO advised us by letter that it had determined
   "continued performance under the purchase order issued for the Quotation
   Request at issue to be in the best interests of the Government." Where, as
   here, an agency determines that it is in the best interest of the
   government to proceed with performance in the face of a protest to our
   Office, and we sustain the protest, we are required by the Competition in
   Contracting Act of 1984, 31 U.S.C. sect. 3554(b)(2) (2000), to make our
   recommendation for corrective action without regard to any cost or
   disruption from terminating the contract, or recompeting or reissuing the
   solicitation. Department of the Navy--Modification of Remedy, B-274944.4,
   July 15, 1997, 97-2 CPD para. 16 at 2-4. Ordinarily, therefore, we would
   recommend that GPO cancel the purchase order issued to TDC and issue an
   order to Data Integrators based on its lowest-priced, timely quotation.
   See, e.g., e-LYNXX Corp., B-292761, Dec. 3, 2003, 2003 CPD para. 219 at
   9-10 (agency directed to conduct new source selection decision and cancel
   order if necessary).

   Here, however, shipment was required by December 31, 2007, and we have
   been advised by GPO that delivery has been completed. Under these
   circumstances, we cannot recommend that GPO cancel TDC's purchase order
   and issue a new order to Data Integrators, since there is no substantial
   part of the purchase order remaining to be performed. See Information
   Ventures, Inc., B-293518, B-293518.2, Mar. 29, 2004, 2004 CPD para. 76 at
   5 (GAO cannot recommend disturbing award where contract for educational
   services was largely completed); International Data Sys., Inc., B-277385,
   Oct. 8, 1997, 97-2 CPD para. 96 at 5 (corrective action not available when
   contract for personal computers fully performed). Accordingly, we
   recommend that Data Integrators be reimbursed its costs of quotation
   preparation and of filing and pursuing the protest, including reasonable
   attorneys' fees. Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. sect. 21.8(d)(1), (2)
   (2007). Data Integrators should submit its certified claim for costs,
   detailing the time expended and costs incurred, directly to GPO within
   60 days after the receipt of this decision.

   The protest is sustained.

   Gary L. Kepplinger
   General Counsel

   ------------------------

   [1] GPO advises that this procurement was conducted under GPO's small
   purchase procedures. AR at 2-3; see GPO, Printing Procurement Regulation,
   Apr. 10, 2001, Ch. VII, sect. 4. Applicability of those procedures,
   however, does not affect our decision.