Enclosure
Page 2 of 2

Table B

Protests Filed Before Award—
Protests Sustained Where Contracts Awarded After Protest Filing

Table C

Protests Filed After Award—
Contracts in Which Performance Was Continued

Defense Agencies Civilian Agencies

1l 23

Protests Filed After Award—
Protests Sustained Where Performance Was Continued

Page 4



atte

r .

£GA0_

United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548

B-158766

January 9, 2002

The Honorable J. Dennis Hastert
Speaker of the House
of Representatives

Dear Mr. Speaker:

This letter responds to the requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act

of 1984, 31 U.S.C. § 3554(e) (Supp. IV 1998), that the Comptroller General report to
the Congress each instance in which.a federal agency did not fully implement a
recommendation made by our Office in connection with a bid protest decided the
prior fiscal year. Although there were no such occurrences with respect to our fiscal
year 2001 recommendations, we are reporting an instance related to a fiscal year 2000
decision, where it only became apparent in fiscal year 2001 that the agency was not
promptly implementing our recommendation. -

In Aberdeen Tech. Servs., Inc., B-283727.2, Feb. 22, 2000, 2000.CPD { 46, we
considered a challenge to the Department of the Army’s decision, reached after a cost
comparison pursuant to Office of Management. and Budget Circular No. A-76, that it
would be more economical to manage and operate base industrial operations in-
house at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, rather than contract for the
services with Aberdeen Technical Services (ATS), which had submitted the best
private-sector proposal in the competition that preceded the comparison. We
sustained ATS’s protest on several grounds. We recommended that the Army correct
errors that we found in the agency’s calculation of the costs of in-house and
contractor performance, as well as in the public/private cost comparison.
Alternatively, we recommended that the Army revise the RFP, reopen discussions,
and conduct a new cost comparison.

The Army did not implement our February 2000 recommendation, but advised our
Office that, while it still plans to resolicit, there will be additional delays in doing so
because of changes in the Army's requirements, requiring that the original solicitation
be canceled. The Army estimates that a new solicitation will be issued in early 2002,
some 2 years after issuance of our decision and recommendation. On June 19) 2001,
we advised the relevant congressional committees that, in our view, this lengthy. -
delay constituted a failure to implement our recommendation. See 31 U.S.C. ~

§ 3554(e)(1) (1994 and Supp. IV 1998).

GAO-02-177R



By decision of August 22, we modified our recommendation, at ATS’s request and
without objection from the Army, to allow the firm to be reimbursed the costs of
preparing its proposal. een T 5 tio) 01

B-283727.3, Aug. 22, 2001, 2001 CPD { ___. ATS has submitted a claim to the Army
detailing the time expended and costs incurred in preparing its proposal; the claim
currently is under consideration by that agency.

During the fiscal year, we received 1,084 protests (including 32 cost claims) and 62
requests for reconsideration, for a total of 1,146 cases. We closed 1,098 cases: 1,040
protests (including 33 cost claims) and 58 requests for reconsideration. Enclosed for
your information are statistics concerning suspensions of contract awards and
performance as a result of bid protests.

A copy of this report, with the enclosure, is being furnished to the Chairman ‘and
Ranking Minority Member of the House Committee on Government Reform. A
similar report is being furnished to the President of the Senate.

Sincerely yours,

Qattanst Hoalon

Anthony H. Gamboa
General Counsel

Enclosure

Page 2



Enclosure
Page 1 of 2

Suspension of Award/Performance Data

BACKGROUND

CICA contains several provisions whose purpose is to enhance the
likelihood that protests can be decided before contract performance
reaches a stage at which corrective action is effectively precluded.
Where an agency is notified of a protest before award, CICA precludes
an award unless the head of the procuring activity makes certain
findings justifying the award. In cases where notice is received within
10 days following the date of award or within 5 days after a required
debriefing, CICA requires the suspension of performance unless the
head of the procuring activity makes certain other findings justifying
the continuance of performance despite the protest.

DATA

The following tables present data regarding the number of contracts
awarded after a protest was filed (table A), the number of protests in
table:A in which GAO sustained the protest (table B), the number of
contracts in which performance was not suspended following a protest
(table C), and the number of cases sustained by GAO in which
performance was not suspended (table D).

Table A

Protests Filed Before Award— :
Contracts Awarded After Protest Filing

. Defense Agencies “yo Civilian Agencies

9

Page 3