B-150978, OCT. 10, 1963
Highlights
STACK AND BUTLER: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED MARCH 22. WRITTEN IN BEHALF OF THE PIERRE LACLEDE FUR COMPANY AND PROTESTING AGAINST A CONTRACT FOR THE PROCESSING AND SALE OF SEALSKINS WHICH WAS AWARDED TO A JOINT VENTURE KNOWN AS SUPARA BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. WE ARE ENCLOSING A COPY OF OUR LETTER OF TODAY TO THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. WHICH IS DIRECTED SPECIFICALLY TO A PROTEST SUBMITTED BY FOUKE FUR COMPANY. WHICH CONCLUDES THAT THE PROCEDURES FOLLOWED IN NEGOTIATING THE CONTRACT WITH SUPARA WERE IN VIOLATION OF LAW AND REGULATIONS AND THAT THE AWARD SHOULD THEREFORE BE RESCINDED. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT LACLEDE'S PROTEST IS DIRECTED PRIMARILY TO THE BASIC PROCEDURES WE HAVE FOUND IMPROPER IN OUR CONSIDERATION OF THE FOUKE PROTEST.
B-150978, OCT. 10, 1963
TO HOUGH, FILIPPINE, STACK AND BUTLER:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED MARCH 22, 1963, WRITTEN IN BEHALF OF THE PIERRE LACLEDE FUR COMPANY AND PROTESTING AGAINST A CONTRACT FOR THE PROCESSING AND SALE OF SEALSKINS WHICH WAS AWARDED TO A JOINT VENTURE KNOWN AS SUPARA BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR.
WE ARE ENCLOSING A COPY OF OUR LETTER OF TODAY TO THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, WHICH IS DIRECTED SPECIFICALLY TO A PROTEST SUBMITTED BY FOUKE FUR COMPANY, AND WHICH CONCLUDES THAT THE PROCEDURES FOLLOWED IN NEGOTIATING THE CONTRACT WITH SUPARA WERE IN VIOLATION OF LAW AND REGULATIONS AND THAT THE AWARD SHOULD THEREFORE BE RESCINDED.
IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT LACLEDE'S PROTEST IS DIRECTED PRIMARILY TO THE BASIC PROCEDURES WE HAVE FOUND IMPROPER IN OUR CONSIDERATION OF THE FOUKE PROTEST, AND SINCE YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE AWARD TO SUPARA WAS IMPROPER AND SHOULD BE RESCINDED IS SUPPORTED BY OUR DECISION ON THE FOUKE PROTEST, NO SEPARATE DECISION BY THIS OFFICE ON THE MERITS OF LACLEDE'S PROTEST IS CONTEMPLATED.