The protester was a sales agent that had submitted a proposal on behalf of its principal. The agency rejected the proposal. The protester then filed a protest on its own behalf. GAO, however, dismissed the protest, finding the protester was not an interested party. While the protester would, as a sales agent, receive some benefit from award of the contract, that benefit was too remote to make the protester an interested party. The principal may have been an interested party, but that interested party status didn’t transfer to the protester.
RJH Supply, LLC, B-421043
Background
The Government Publishing Office (GPO) issued an RFQ seeking trail signage for the National Park Service. RJH Supply, an authorized sales and marketing agent for Federal Prison Industries, Inc. (UNICOR), submitted a quotation on behalf of UNICOR. GPO rejected RJH’s quotation because RJH had not followed the RFQ’s submission instructions. RJH filed a protest with GAO.
Analysis
GPO asked GAO to dismiss the protest, arguing that as a sales agent for UNICOR, RJH didn’t have a direct economic interest that would be impacted by award of the contract. RJH acknowledged that it had filed the protest on behalf of itself, not UNICOR. Nevertheless, RJH reasoned that as UNICOR’s agent, it had an economic interest in the award. RJH had a supply contract with UNICOR so any award to UNICOR would ultimately redound to RJH’s benefit.
GAO sided with the agency. Sales agents are not interested parties to protest simply because they would receive some economic benefit from an award to their principal. That benefit is still too remote to maintain a protest.
RJH is represented by Robert Hoffman of RJH Supply. The agency is represented by James Goodman of the Government Publishing Office. GAO attorneys Michael P. Price and John Sorrenti participated in the preparation of the decision.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
