B-145771, MAY 31, 1962
Highlights
TO DYNAMETRICS CORPORATION: RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED OF A LETTER DATED MAY 3. THE QUESTIONS AS TO WHETHER INVITATION NO. 33-604-61-397 WAS EFFECTIVE OR AMBIGUOUS. WHETHER THE TWO BIDS RECEIVED WERE RESPONSIVE TO THE INVITATION. WERE THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION DATED OCTOBER 17. THIS DECISION WAS RECONSIDERED IN OUR LETTERS DATED NOVEMBER 1. IN THOSE DECISIONS EACH CONTENTION ADVANCED BY YOU WAS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED AND FOR THE REASONS STATED IT WAS DETERMINED. THAT WHILE THE INVITATION COULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO MORE DEFINITE TERMS WITH RESPECT TO THE BRAND NAME REQUIREMENTS AND COMPONENTS. IT WAS CLEAR THAT BOTH YOUR BID AND THAT OF THE CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION WERE RESPONSIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INVITATION.
B-145771, MAY 31, 1962
TO DYNAMETRICS CORPORATION:
RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED OF A LETTER DATED MAY 3, 1962, WRITTEN IN YOUR BEHALF, BY MR. E. M. FRIEDMAN, SETTING FORTH A STILL FURTHER BASIS OF PROTEST AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO THE CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION BY THE GENTILE AIR FORCE STATION, DAYTON, OHIO, UNDER INVITATION NO. 33-604-61-397 FOR FURNISHING PRIMARY PRESSURE STANDARD CALIBRATION SYSTEMS, SPARE PARTS AND ACCESSORIES.
THE QUESTIONS AS TO WHETHER INVITATION NO. 33-604-61-397 WAS EFFECTIVE OR AMBIGUOUS, WHETHER THE TWO BIDS RECEIVED WERE RESPONSIVE TO THE INVITATION, ETC., WERE THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION DATED OCTOBER 17, 1961, TO THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE AND, UPON REQUESTS FROM YOU, THIS DECISION WAS RECONSIDERED IN OUR LETTERS DATED NOVEMBER 1, 1961 AND DECEMBER 7, 1961, TO YOU. IN THOSE DECISIONS EACH CONTENTION ADVANCED BY YOU WAS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED AND FOR THE REASONS STATED IT WAS DETERMINED, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT WHILE THE INVITATION COULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO MORE DEFINITE TERMS WITH RESPECT TO THE BRAND NAME REQUIREMENTS AND COMPONENTS, IT WAS CLEAR THAT BOTH YOUR BID AND THAT OF THE CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION WERE RESPONSIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INVITATION; ALSO, THAT NEITHER BIDDER WAS MISLED BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INVITATION OR OTHERWISE PREJUDICED. THIS BEING THE CASE, THE AWARD OF THE CONTRACT TO THE CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION AS THE LOW BIDDER WAS HELD TO BE PROPER.
IN MR. FRIEDMAN'S LETTER OF MAY 3, 1962, HE NOW ALLEGES THAT YOUR INTERESTS WERE PREJUDICED BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INVITATION FOR BIDS BECAUSE YOUR BID HAD TO BE PREDICATED UPON FURNISHING A COMPLETE SET OF WEIGHTS WITH THE UNIT, WHEREAS YOU NOW HAVE LEARNED THAT THE CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION HAS DELIVERED THE FIRST ARTICLE REQUIRED UNDER THE CONTRACT AND THAT THE UNIT CONTAINS ONLY 40 PERCENT OF THE WEIGHTS.
THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION'S BID RESULTED IN A CONTRACT REQUIRING THAT CORPORATION TO DELIVER COMPLETE CALIBRATING SYSTEMS THAT CONFORMED TO THE SPECIFICATIONS. THEREFORE, SINCE THE QUESTION NOW RAISED BY MR. FRIEDMAN APPEARS TO BE ONE PERTAINING SOLELY TO SPECIFICATION COMPLIANCE OF THE UNIT, WHICH WAS OTHERWISE PROPERLY CONTRACTED FOR, THE MATTER CONCERNS THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT INVOLVED AND, AS SUCH, IS FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE FIRST INSTANCE BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CONCERNED. IT IS THEREFORE SUGGESTED THAT, IF YOU WISH TO PURSUE THE MATTER FURTHER, YOU INVITE THE ATTENTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER OF THE GENTILE AIR FORCE STATION TO THIS ALLEGEDLY IMPROPER COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION.