Skip to main content

B-145771, NOV. 1, 1961

B-145771 Nov 01, 1961
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

TO DYNAMETRICS CORPORATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 23. THE FACTS IN THIS CASE WERE SET OUT IN OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 17. ONLY TWO BIDS WERE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE SUBJECT INVITATION. ONE BID HAVING BEEN SUBMITTED BY YOU AND THE OTHER BID WAS SUBMITTED BY CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION. YOU NOW INDICATE THAT NO AWARD SHOULD BE MADE TO CONSOLIDATED SINCE THE INVITATION WAS AMBIGUOUS. IF YOU BELIEVED THAT THE INVITATION WAS AMBIGUOUS. YOU SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS MATTER TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER BEFORE BIDS WERE OPENED AND BEFORE THE AMOUNTS OF THE BIDS WERE ASCERTAINED. THE ACCEPTANCE OF ITS BID WILL RESULT IN A CONTRACT REQUIRING IT TO DELIVER THE COMPLETE CALIBRATION SYSTEM.

View Decision

B-145771, NOV. 1, 1961

TO DYNAMETRICS CORPORATION:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 23, 1961, REQUESTING IN EFFECT RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 17, 1961, DENYING YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE PROPOSED AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 33-604-61 397, ISSUED ON MARCH 6, 1961, BY GENTILE AIR FORCE STATION, DAYTON, OHIO, FOR FURNISHING PRIMARY PRESSURE STANDARD CALIBRATION SYSTEMS, SPARE PARTS AND ACCESSORIES.

THE FACTS IN THIS CASE WERE SET OUT IN OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 17, 1961, AND NEED NOT BE RESTATED.

ONLY TWO BIDS WERE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE SUBJECT INVITATION, ONE BID HAVING BEEN SUBMITTED BY YOU AND THE OTHER BID WAS SUBMITTED BY CONSOLIDATED ELECTRODYNAMICS CORPORATION. ALTHOUGH IT APPEARS FROM PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE THAT YOU HAD BID ON A COMPLETE SYSTEM, YOU NOW INDICATE THAT NO AWARD SHOULD BE MADE TO CONSOLIDATED SINCE THE INVITATION WAS AMBIGUOUS. IF YOU BELIEVED THAT THE INVITATION WAS AMBIGUOUS, YOU SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS MATTER TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER BEFORE BIDS WERE OPENED AND BEFORE THE AMOUNTS OF THE BIDS WERE ASCERTAINED. CONSOLIDATED ENTERED ITS BID OPPOSITE THE ITEM DESCRIPTION THEREBY INDICATING THAT IT OFFERED THE COMPLETE ASSEMBLY. THE ACCEPTANCE OF ITS BID WILL RESULT IN A CONTRACT REQUIRING IT TO DELIVER THE COMPLETE CALIBRATION SYSTEM. WHATEVER AMBIGUITY THERE MAY HAVE BEEN IN THE INVITATION DID NOT OPERATE TO THE PREJUDICE OF ANYONE, SINCE BOTH CONSOLIDATED AND YOU OFFERED THE PRODUCT CALLED FOR.

SINCE NOTHING HAS BEEN FURNISHED WHICH WOULD WARRANT A CHANGE IN THE CONCLUSION HERETOFORE REACHED IN THIS CASE, THE DECISION OF OCTOBER 17, 1961, IS AFFIRMED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs