The agency posted a solicitation to SAM. The protester, however, never received a notification from SAM about the solicitation. This was unfortunate for the protester, but a failure of SAM’s notification function does not amount to a violation of procurement law.
Excelsior Ambulance Service, Inc., GAO B-421948
- Protest Argument – The protester didn’t learn about a solicitation issued by the agency. The protester argued the agency had not satisfied the solicitation dissemination requirements in FAR part 5.
- SAM Notification – The agency posted the solicitation to SAM.gov. But the protester claimed it never received a notification about the solicitation from SAM. GAO said this didn’t state a valid protest. Protesters are charged with constructive knowledge of procurement actions published on SAM. While the SAM notification is useful, reliance on that feature does not nullify the protester’s constructive knowledge once the solicitation has been posted. What’s more, the protester had not explained how a failure of the SAM notification function violated procurement law.
- Intent to Submit – The protester also argued it expressly informed the agency that it intended to submit a proposal for the solicitation. The protester reasoned the agency should have let it know the solicitation was about to drop. But the agency denied the protester ever indicated an intent to submit. The protester had no proof of communicating this intent. GAO dismissed this protest ground, too.
The protester is represented by William W. Weisberg of the Law Offices of William Weisberg, PLLC. The agency is represented by Deborah K. Morrell of the Department of Veterans Affairs. GAO attorneys Paula W. Williams and Evan D. Wesser participated in the decision.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
