B-199690.2, L/M, NOV 2, 1981
Highlights
DIGEST: CONGRESSMAN'S REFERRAL OF INFORMATION CONCERNING AN ONGOING PROCUREMENT AGENCY REVIEW OF SPECIFICATIONS WHICH WERE FOUND UNOBJECTIONABLE IN PRIOR DECISION AND RECONSIDERATION PROVIDES NO BASIS TO CHANGE CONCLUSION BECAUSE THE MATTER WAS CONSIDERED ON RECONSIDERATION AND THE RESULTS OF THE REVIEW PROPERLY APPLY TO FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. SPARKLET'S PROTEST AGAINST THE SOLICITATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR CARBON DIOXIDE CYLINDERS USED TO INFLATE THE KIT'S LIFE RAFT WAS DENIED IN SPARKLET DEVICES. WE WERE AWARE OF THE COMMITTEE'S REQUEST AND THE ONGOING AIR FORCE REVIEW WHICH WERE DISCUSSED IN OUR DECISION. WE HELD THAT THE SUBSEQUENT AIR FORCE REVIEW DID NOT AFFECT OUR CONCLUSION THAT THE SOLICITATION SPECIFICATIONS REFLECTED THE AIR FORCE'S MINIMUM NEEDS AT THE TIME IT WAS ISSUED.
B-199690.2, L/M, NOV 2, 1981
DIGEST: CONGRESSMAN'S REFERRAL OF INFORMATION CONCERNING AN ONGOING PROCUREMENT AGENCY REVIEW OF SPECIFICATIONS WHICH WERE FOUND UNOBJECTIONABLE IN PRIOR DECISION AND RECONSIDERATION PROVIDES NO BASIS TO CHANGE CONCLUSION BECAUSE THE MATTER WAS CONSIDERED ON RECONSIDERATION AND THE RESULTS OF THE REVIEW PROPERLY APPLY TO FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.
RICHARD A. GEPHARDT, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER TO OUR OFFICE DATED OCTOBER 2, 1981, IN REGARD TO OUR RECONSIDERATION OF THE PROTEST BY SPARKLET DEVICES, INC., AGAINST A CONTRACT AWARDED BY THE DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA) TO AMERICAN SAFETY FLIGHT SYSTEMS, INC., FOR AIRCRAFT SURVIVAL KIT INFLATION ASSEMBLIES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE. SPARKLET'S PROTEST AGAINST THE SOLICITATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR CARBON DIOXIDE CYLINDERS USED TO INFLATE THE KIT'S LIFE RAFT WAS DENIED IN SPARKLET DEVICES, INC., 60 COMP.GEN. (B-199690, JUNE 4, 1981), 81-1 CPD 446. YOUR LETTER FORWARDED AN INTERIM AIR FORCE RESPONSE TO YOU CONCERNING THE CYLINDER PROCUREMENT REVIEW BEING CONDUCTED BY THE AIR FORCE AT THE REQUEST OF THE TRI-SERVICE STEERING COMMITTEE.
ALTHOUGH WE RECEIVED YOUR LETTER SUBSEQUENT TO OUR AFFIRMING THE PRIOR DECISION IN SPARKLET DEVICES, INC. - RECONSIDERATION, B-199690.2, OCTOBER 8, 1981, WE WERE AWARE OF THE COMMITTEE'S REQUEST AND THE ONGOING AIR FORCE REVIEW WHICH WERE DISCUSSED IN OUR DECISION. WE HELD THAT THE SUBSEQUENT AIR FORCE REVIEW DID NOT AFFECT OUR CONCLUSION THAT THE SOLICITATION SPECIFICATIONS REFLECTED THE AIR FORCE'S MINIMUM NEEDS AT THE TIME IT WAS ISSUED.
WE HAVE REVIEWED THE INFORMATION PROVIDED TO YOU BY THE AIR FORCE CONCERNING THE DIFFERENCES IN SURVIVAL KIT USE BY THAT AGENCY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, AND CONSIDER THE INFORMATION CONSISTENT WITH DLA'S REPORT ON THE SPARKLET PROTEST. THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO BASIS UPON WHICH TO REACH CONCLUSIONS CONTRARY TO OUR DECISIONS ON THE PROTEST.
WE SHARE YOUR CONCERN THAT PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD ENCOURAGE MAXIMUM COMPETITION CONSISTENT WITH THE CONTRACTING AGENCY'S ACTUAL NEEDS AT COST SAVINGS TO THE GOVERNMENT. WHILE WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATION AND THE AIR FORCE CYLINDER PROCUREMENT REVIEW MIGHT EVENTUALLY ADOPT SPARKLET'S POSITION, WE REMAIN OF THE OPINION THAT THE RESULTS PROPERLY APPLY TO FUTURE PROCUREMENTS BY AND FOR THE AIR FORCE.