B-186828, JUL 22, 1976
Highlights
CONTRACTOR'S REPAIR OF EQUIPMENT CONTRARY TO SPECIFICATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BY OUR OFFICE SINCE ALLEGATIONS INVOLVE MATTERS OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION WHICH IS FUNCTION AND RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTING AGENCY AND NOT FOR RESOLUTION UNDER BID PROTEST PROCEDURES. DYNETERIA ALLEGES THAT ON THE DATE CONTRACT PERFORMANCE WAS TO BEGIN AND THE ON-SITE INSPECTION WAS TO BE MADE. NO GOVERNMENT INSPECTORS WERE AVAILABLE AND NO INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED. IT IS ALLEGED THAT THE CONTRACTOR'S ON-SITE EQUIPMENT WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS AND NUMEROUS PERSONNEL OF THE CONTRACTOR WERE PERFORMING REPAIRS ON THE EQUIPMENT CONTRARY TO SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS THAT NO WORK WAS TO BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR ON THE EQUIPMENT DURING THE INSPECTION PERIOD.
B-186828, JUL 22, 1976
ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING AGENCY'S FAILURE TO MAKE ON-SITE INSPECTION OF CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT, CONTRACTOR EQUIPMENT NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS, AND CONTRACTOR'S REPAIR OF EQUIPMENT CONTRARY TO SPECIFICATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BY OUR OFFICE SINCE ALLEGATIONS INVOLVE MATTERS OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION WHICH IS FUNCTION AND RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTING AGENCY AND NOT FOR RESOLUTION UNDER BID PROTEST PROCEDURES.
DYNETERIA, INC.:
BY TELEGRAM DATED JUNE 27, 1976, AND LETTER DATED JUNE 28, 1976, DYNETERIA, INC. (DYNETERIA), MAKES CERTAIN ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING WHAT IT CONSIDERS TO BE UNSATISFACTORY ADMINISTRATION OF A CONTRACT AWARDED TO MAYTAG AIRCRAFT COMPANY PURSUANT TO SOLICITATION NO. DSA600-76-R 0535, ISSUED BY THE DEFENSE FUEL SUPPLY CENTER, DEFENSE SUPPLY AGENCY (DSA), CAMERON STATION, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA.
SPECIFICALLY, DYNETERIA ALLEGES THAT ON THE DATE CONTRACT PERFORMANCE WAS TO BEGIN AND THE ON-SITE INSPECTION WAS TO BE MADE, NO GOVERNMENT INSPECTORS WERE AVAILABLE AND NO INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED. IN ADDITION, IT IS ALLEGED THAT THE CONTRACTOR'S ON-SITE EQUIPMENT WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS AND NUMEROUS PERSONNEL OF THE CONTRACTOR WERE PERFORMING REPAIRS ON THE EQUIPMENT CONTRARY TO SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS THAT NO WORK WAS TO BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR ON THE EQUIPMENT DURING THE INSPECTION PERIOD.
THESE MATTERS PERTAIN TO CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION WHICH IS THE FUNCTION AND RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTING AGENCY. MATTERS OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION ARE NOT FOR RESOLUTION UNDER OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES WHICH ARE RESERVED FOR CONSIDERING WHETHER AN AWARD, OR PROPOSED AWARD, OF A CONTRACT COMPLIES WITH STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND OTHER LEGAL REQUIREMENTS. SEE INTER-ALLOYS CORPORATION, B-182890, FEBRUARY 4, 1975, 75-1 CPD 79.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE WILL NOT CONSIDER THE ALLEGATIONS ON THE MERITS.