Whoa! Be Sure to Check that SAM Registration Before You Submit a Proposal!

The protester argued the awardee was ineligible because its System for Award Management (SAM) registration had lapsed after it submitted its proposal. GAO agreed. The awardee’s registration had lapsed for one day while the agency was evaluating proposals. That lapse negated the awardee’s proposal. 

TLS Joint Venture, LLC, GAO, B-422275 

• FAR 52.204-7 – The protester challenged an award. The protester contended the solicitation incorporated FAR 52.204-7, which requires an offeror to be continuously registered with SAM from the submission of the proposal, through contract award and performance. The protester argued the awardee’s SAM registration had lapsed in the evaluation period—that is, the period after proposal submission but before award. 
• Continuous SAM Registration – The agency argued FAR 52.204-7 doesn’t require continuous SAM registration; it only requires a company to be registered when it submits a proposal. GAO found the agency’s argument was belied by the plain language of FAR 52.204-7, which sates an offeror is required to be register with SAM when submitting an offer, “and shall continue to be registered until time of award.” 
• Lapsed Registration – The agency argued the awardee’s SAM registration had not lapsed during the evaluation period, because the awardee had applied for renewal before its registration expired. But GAO found the SAM renewal process has two steps. First, the contractor must submit their renewal information. Second, the government must validate the information. Here, the contractor submitted the information before expiration. But the government did validate the information until a day after the expiration date. Thus, the awardee’s registration had lapsed; it was ineligible for award. 

The protester is represented by Adam K. Lasky, Erica L. Bakies, and Bret C. Marfut of Seyfarth Shaw LLP. The agency is represented by Justin V. Briones and Albert G. Courie, III of the General Services Administration. GAO attorneys Todd C. Culliton and Tania Calhoun participated in the decision. 

–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Editor in Chief