B-170174, APR 22, 1971
Highlights
PROTESTANT'S CLAIM THAT TOLERANCE FOR PARACHUTE SYSTEMS WERE IMPOSED AFTER OPENING OF BIDS TO AID OTHER BIDDERS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD. INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 5. YOU POINT OUT THAT THE DECISION CONTAINS A QUOTATION FROM THE WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE REPORT WHICH STATES THAT "IN A MEETING WITH SANDIA CORPORATION AND AFSWC PERSONNEL AT KIRTLAND AFB ON 20 AUGUST 1970 THE TOLERANCES FOR THE OVERTEST CONDITION WERE DEFINED AS PLUS 3 MINUS 5 PERCENT.". SINCE BIDS UNDER THE FIRST IFB WERE OPENED JUNE 30. BIDS UNDER THE SECOND IFB WERE OPENED AUGUST 4. YOU QUESTION THE PROPRIETY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TOLERANCES AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS AND YOU INQUIRE WHETHER "THE MINUS 5% LIMIT (WAS) SET UP TO BRING STEINTHAL'S AND PIONEER'S TESTS INTO THE 'BALL PARK.'" ALTHOUGH THE QUOTED WRIGHT-PATTERSON STATEMENT INDICATES THAT THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS OF THE TOLERANCES AT THE AUGUST 20.
B-170174, APR 22, 1971
BID PROTEST - QUALIFIED PRODUCTS LIST AFFIRMING PRIOR DECISION DENYING PROTEST OF SWITLIK PARACHUTE COMPANY AGAINST THE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES USED BY THE AIR FORCE IN TESTING PARACHUTE SYSTEMS FOR INCLUSION ON THE QUALIFIED PRODUCTS LIST IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROCUREMENT OF AIR FORCE TYPE A/B 28K-5 PARACHUTE SYSTEMS UNDER AN IFB ISSUED BY SAN ANTONIO AIR MATERIEL AREA, KELLY AFB, TEXAS. SINCE TWO OTHER BIDDERS APPEARED ON THE QUALIFIED LIST A MONTH PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORIGINAL IFB, PROTESTANT'S CLAIM THAT TOLERANCE FOR PARACHUTE SYSTEMS WERE IMPOSED AFTER OPENING OF BIDS TO AID OTHER BIDDERS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD.
TO SWITLIK PARACHUTE COMPANY, INC.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 5, 1971, IN WHICH YOU QUESTION SOME STATEMENTS AND DISPUTE OTHERS APPEARING IN DECISION B 170174, JANUARY 22, 1971, 50 COMP. GEN. . THE DECISION DENIED YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES UTILIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE IN TESTING YOUR FIRM'S PARACHUTE SYSTEM FOR INCLUSION ON QUALIFIED PRODUCTS LIST (QPL) 83255-1 IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROCUREMENT OF AIR FORCE TYPE A/B 28K-5 PARACHUTE SYSTEMS UNDER INVITATIONS FOR BIDS (IFB) NOS. F41608-70-B-1250 AND F41608-71-B-0058, ISSUED BY THE SAN ANTONIO AIR MATERIEL AREA, KELLY AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS.
YOU POINT OUT THAT THE DECISION CONTAINS A QUOTATION FROM THE WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE REPORT WHICH STATES THAT "IN A MEETING WITH SANDIA CORPORATION AND AFSWC PERSONNEL AT KIRTLAND AFB ON 20 AUGUST 1970 THE TOLERANCES FOR THE OVERTEST CONDITION WERE DEFINED AS PLUS 3 MINUS 5 PERCENT." SINCE BIDS UNDER THE FIRST IFB WERE OPENED JUNE 30, 1970, AND BIDS UNDER THE SECOND IFB WERE OPENED AUGUST 4, 1970, YOU QUESTION THE PROPRIETY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TOLERANCES AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS AND YOU INQUIRE WHETHER "THE MINUS 5% LIMIT (WAS) SET UP TO BRING STEINTHAL'S AND PIONEER'S TESTS INTO THE 'BALL PARK.'"
ALTHOUGH THE QUOTED WRIGHT-PATTERSON STATEMENT INDICATES THAT THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS OF THE TOLERANCES AT THE AUGUST 20, 1970, ASD MEETING WITH SANDIA AND AFSWC, WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT STATEMENT AS INDICATING THAT THE TOLERANCES WERE ESTABLISHED AT THAT TIME SINCE IT HAD BEEN REPORTED TO US PREVIOUSLY THAT THE STEINTHAL AND PIONEER PARACHUTE SYSTEMS WERE QUALIFIED WITHIN THE PERMISSIBLE TOLERANCES. MOREOVER, SINCE STEINTHAL APPEARED ON QPL 83255-1, ISSUED ON MARCH 4, 1970, AND PIONEER QUALIFIED ITS PARACHUTE SYSTEM ON MARCH 17, 1970, BOTH DATES WHICH WERE MORE THAN A MONTH IN ADVANCE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORIGINAL IFB, YOUR SUGGESTION THAT THE TOLERANCES WERE IMPOSED AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS APPEARS TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD.
IN ADDITION TO THE FOREGOING YOU HAVE DISPUTED SEVERAL OF THE STATEMENTS MADE BY THE AIR FORCE IN ITS REPORT TO OUR OFFICE. HOWEVER, YOU HAVE SUBMITTED NOTHING THAT OVERCOMES THE FACTS AS SET FORTH BY THE AGENCY IN ITS REPORT.
ACCORDINGLY, UPON REVIEW, WE FIND NO REASON TO DISTURB THE DECISION OF JANUARY 22, 1971.