SUSPENSION OF PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY GRANTED IN PART: November 23, 1993 GSBCA 12667-P, 12670-P PINDAR DONNELLEY PARTNERSHIP, Protester, and GRAPHICDATA, INC., Protester/Intervenor,[foot #] 1 v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Respondent, and INTERNATIONAL COMPUTAPRINT CORPORATION, Intervenor. Michael A. Nemeroff, Francis J. O'Toole, Gary P. Quigley, Joseph C. Port, Jr., and Denise W. DeFranco of Sidley & Austin, Washington, DC, counsel for Protester Pindar Donnelley Partnership. Richard D. Lieberman, J. Randolph MacPherson, and Jane B. Maxwell of Sullivan & Worcester, Washington, DC, counsel for proposed Protester/Intervenor GraphicData, Inc. ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 1 The Board has not yet ruled on the objection to GraphicData, Inc.'s request to intervene or on its status as a protester, but has allowed it to participate in the protest proceedings pending such ruling. ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- Jerry A. Walz, Mark Langstein, Lisa J. Obayashi, and Fred Kopatich, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Finance and Litigation, Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. Joseph J. Petrillo, Michael A. Hordell, Laurel A. Heneghan, and Jessica C. Abrahams of Petrillo & Hordell, Washington, DC; and Burton Schwalb of Schwalb, Donnenfeld, Bray & Silbert, Washington, DC, counsel for Intervenor International ComputaPrint Corporation. WILLIAMS, Board Judge. Background In this protest, Pindar Donnelley Partnership (Pindar) challenges the Patent and Trademark Office's (PTO's) proposed award of a contract to International ComputaPrint Corporation (ICC) under request for proposal (RFP) number 52-PAPT-0-00027. ICC is also the incumbent contractor on an existing contract for similar services. This matter comes before the Board on protester's request for a suspension of the agency's procurement authority pending resolution of this protest. Protester seeks a suspension not only of the imminent award being challenged here,[foot #] 2 but also of the contract under which ICC is currently performing.[foot #] 3 Discussion On April 30, 1993, PTO published a notice in the Commerce Business Daily announcing its intent to modify ICC's incumbent contract by extending the period of performance from June 1993 through November 30, 1993, with two additional three-month options for extension through February 1994 and May 1994 respectively, while PTO continued the competitive procurement under Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 52-PAPT-0-00027. Intervenor ICC's Suspension Hearing Exhibit 1. On June 1, 1993, PTO awarded ICC the extension of its incumbent contract. Declaration of Joseph Dariano, President, International ComputaPrint Corporation (November 15, 1993), 1. ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 2 The agency expects to award this new contract within thirty days of the suspension hearing in this protest, which was held on November 17-18, 1993. [foot #] 3 Pindar requested that the Board "suspend the PTO's procurement authority and direct that the PTO suspend any contract performances by ICC pending a decision by the Board on the merits of this protest." Complaint at 17. ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- The instant protest was filed on November 5, 1993, long after award of the contract extension. Pindar's protest complaint fails to establish the timeliness of its request that work being performed under this extension to the incumbent contract be suspended. Because Pindar did not file its protest and request for suspension within ten calendar days of award of the extension, its request for suspension is untimely and must be denied. 40 U.S.C. 759(f)(3) (1988); see RMTC Systems, Inc. v. Department of the Army, GSBCA 12303-P, 93-2 BCA 25,890, 1993 BPD 51; Federal Support Group, Inc. v. Department of the Army, GSBCA 11803-P, 92-3 BCA 25,078, 1992 BPD 119. As a result of a telephonic conference between the Board and the parties on November 19, 1993, respondent has agreed to a voluntary suspension of its authority to proceed under RFP No. 52-PAPT-0-0027 pending resolution of this protest. Decision Protester Pindar's request for a suspension of respondent's procurement authority is GRANTED IN PART.[foot #] 4 Pindar's request for a suspension of the agency's procurement authority governing ICC's incumbent contract is DENIED AS UNTIMELY. Pindar's unopposed request that the PTO suspend any further action under RFP No. 52-PAPT-0-00027 pending resolution of this protest is GRANTED. _____________________________ MARY ELLEN COSTER WILLIAMS Board Judge ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 4 Respondent has moved to dismiss this protest on the ground that the procurement is not for automatic data processing equipment. Although the question of jurisdiction is open, we have proceeded with a hearing and this ruling on the issue of suspension of contract performance consistent with the general rule that we may, if appropriate, preserve the status quo while determining our authority to consider the case fully. Sector Technology, GSBCA 10566-P, 90-2 BCA 22,865, at 114,854, _________________ 1990 BPD 79, at 6, citing United States v. United Mine Workers ______ _____________________________________ of America, 330 U.S. 258, 291-93 (1947). __________