B-134407, JAN. 8, 1958

B-134407: Jan 8, 1958

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

INC.: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 13. ALLEGEDLY ON THE GROUND THAT YOU WERE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE A "REGULAR DEALER" IN THE ITEMS UPON WHICH YOU BID. THE LOW BID ON ITEM NO. 1 WAS RECEIVED FROM THE MILTON MANUFACTURING COMPANY. THE AWARD OF THE ITEM WAS MADE TO THIS FIRM. YOUR BID PRICE OF $2.745 WAS THE LOWEST SUBMITTED ON ITEM NO. 2 OF THE REQUEST. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT YOU DID NOT QUALIFY AS A "REGULAR DEALER" IN THE ITEM. ITEM NO. 2 WAS AWARDED TO SCOVELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY. AS YOU WERE ADVISED BY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 19 FROM THE PURCHASING ACTIVITY. THE AWARDED CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN FULLY COMPLETED. IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO CANCEL THE AWARDS. FROM SUCH FACTS AS ARE AVAILABLE TO US.

B-134407, JAN. 8, 1958

TO MANHATTAN LIGHTING EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC.:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 13, 1957, PROTESTING THE ACTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER FOR THE YARDS AND DOCKS SUPPLY OFFICE, PORT HUENOME, CALIFORNIA, IN HAVING REFUSED TO AWARD YOU ITEMS NOS. 1 AND 2 OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 617-107/58, ISSUED AUGUST 23, 1957, ALLEGEDLY ON THE GROUND THAT YOU WERE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE A "REGULAR DEALER" IN THE ITEMS UPON WHICH YOU BID.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT WHICH WE REQUESTED OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HAS NOW BEEN RECEIVED. FROM AN ANALYSIS OF THE FACTS AS DISCLOSED THEREIN, IT APPEARS THAT IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID REQUEST, YOU SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL DATED SEPTEMBER 11, 1957, WHEREIN YOU QUOTED THE RESPECTIVE UNIT PRICES OF $6.59 AND $2.745 ON THE ITEMS OF PNEUMATIC TIRE PRESSURE GAGES, AS DESCRIBED OPPOSITE ITEMS NOS. 1 AND 2. THE LOW BID ON ITEM NO. 1 WAS RECEIVED FROM THE MILTON MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., THE MANUFACTURER OF THE ITEM IT PROPOSED TO FURNISH, AND ACCORDINGLY, THE AWARD OF THE ITEM WAS MADE TO THIS FIRM. YOUR BID PRICE OF $2.745 WAS THE LOWEST SUBMITTED ON ITEM NO. 2 OF THE REQUEST, BUT, UPON THE BASIS OF THE RECORDS THEN AVAILABLE TO THE CONTRACTING AGENCY, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT YOU DID NOT QUALIFY AS A "REGULAR DEALER" IN THE ITEM, AND THE MAKE OF GAGE OFFERED BY YOU HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY FOUND NOT TO MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS CITED IN THE INVITATION. CONSEQUENTLY, ITEM NO. 2 WAS AWARDED TO SCOVELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., MANUFACTURER OF THE PRODUCT, AT THE SLIGHTLY HIGHER BID PRICE OF $2.78 EACH. AS YOU WERE ADVISED BY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 19 FROM THE PURCHASING ACTIVITY, THE AWARDED CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN FULLY COMPLETED, AND PAYMENTS MADE FOR THE SUPPLIES DELIVERED. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO CANCEL THE AWARDS, AS REQUESTED BY YOU.

FROM SUCH FACTS AS ARE AVAILABLE TO US, IT APPEARS THAT YOUR PROTEST STEMS MAINLY FROM THE SURVEY REPORT PREPARED EARLY THIS YEAR UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL, NEW YORK CITY, WHICH CONTAINED A LIST OF THE ITEMS UPON WHICH YOU WERE FOUND QUALIFIED TO BID AS A "REGULAR DEALER.' HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO ADVICE RECENTLY RECEIVED FROM THE BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, THE PURCHASING ACTIVITIES UNDER ITS JURISDICTION HAVE NOW BEEN INSTRUCTED TO DISREGARD THE SAID SURVEY REPORT AND TO MAKE THEIR DETERMINATIONS AS TO THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE BIDDERS UPON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

IN VIEW THEREOF, AND SINCE THE ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE OF WHICH YOU HAVE COMPLAINED HAS NOW BEEN REMEDIED, NO FURTHER ACTION WITH RESPECT TO YOUR PROTEST WOULD BE WARRANTED AT THIS TIME.