Pacific Data Systems has filed an appeal with the Office of Public Accountability seeking the reversal of the General Services Agency’s decision to dismiss its protest of the award of a telecommunications contract to GTA TeleGuam Holdings.
“The government has the right to know with whom it is doing business namely which entity is providing which services “” John Day president of PDS said in a notice of appeal filed with OPA on Oct. 19.
“”It is only if the government knows this that the government can determine whether the entity actually providing the services is properly licensed “” he said.
GSA dismissed the protests filed separately by PDS Docomo Pacific MCV Broadband and IT&E which questioned GTA’s alleged failure to disclose its owners.
In a decision issued Oct. 5 GSA buyer supervisor Anita Cruz said the protests were “”without merit”” and that the ownership issue raised by the carriers was “”considered to be a minor informality and was cured pursuant to the rules.””
Only PDS filed an appeal with the OPA to challenge GSA’s Oct. 5 decision.
Daniel Tydingco GTA executive vice president of external and legal affairs reserved comment on PDS’s new appeal. “”We respect the process and will allow the proper presiding authorities the opportunity to exhaustively review and make final determinations.””
Reiterating its previous position PDS argued that the procurement law requires bidders to disclose the shareholders who own more than a 10% interest in the company “”during the 12-month period immediately preceding submission of a bid.”” (See “”Stop that! Carriers oppose contract award to GTA”” in the May 21 issue of the Journal.)
GTA was owned by California-based Shamrock Capital Advisors until its stocks were transferred to Advantage Partners Teleguam Holdings Inc. in June 2011.
PDS alleged GTA’s original affidavit of ownership indicated it was fully owned by AP Holdings and omitted reference to Shamrock. GSA later allowed GTA to correct the affidavit.
PDS cited a precedent with OPA noting GTA made the same mistake when it participated in the bid and was awarded the contract for the Guam Community College’s telecommunications services. In that case the OPA nullified the GCC-GTA contract pointing out that “”failure to submit a valid major shareholders disclosure affidavit with its bid is a matter of substance and not merely a matter of form.””
PDS also questioned the “”extra terms and conditions”” – not included the invitation for bid – that GTA allegedly inserted into its bid. This includes GTA’s inclusion of a penalty clause for cancellation of service.
PDS was awarded a majority of the multiple award contract while GTA was selected to provide wireless service cellular phone devices broadband and Internet access. The Wi-Fi service portion was split between GTA and IT&E.