Skip to main content

B-139489, AUG. 3, 1959

B-139489 Aug 03, 1959
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

MCCHORD AND HALTER: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO OUR LETTER OF MAY 13. RECEIPT IS ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED OF YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 8. PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS WERE ADVISED IN THE INVITATION THAT DELIVERY OF THE TWO MACHINES WAS REQUIRED TO BE MADE WITHIN EIGHT WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THE CONTRACT. BIDS WERE OPENED ON FEBRUARY 25. IS REPORTED THAT. " FOR THE REASON THAT THIS ATTACHMENT WAS A PATENTED FEATURE OFFERED BY THE DEVLIEG MACHINE COMPANY AND. WAS LOW BUT WAS REJECTED AS NOT CONFORMING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARD WAS MADE ON APRIL 20. IT IS REPORTED THAT ONE OF THE TWO MACHINES WAS SHIPPED BY THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER ON MAY 19. CONTEND THAT THE LUCAS BORING MACHINE CAN AND DOES ACCOMPLISH THE NECESSARY END RESULT CALLED FOR IN PARAGRAPH 3.27.1 OF THE SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT THEIR BID SHOULD NOT BEEN REJECTED BECAUSE THE MACHINE OFFERED BY THEM DID NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED ROTATING TURRET BAR.

View Decision

B-139489, AUG. 3, 1959

TO CALFEE, FOGG, MCCHORD AND HALTER:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO OUR LETTER OF MAY 13, 1959, RELATIVE TO THE JOINT PROTEST OF YOUR CLIENTS, LUCAS MACHINE DIVISION OF THE NEW BRITAIN MACHINE COMPANY AND DELAWARE VALLEY MACHINERY, INC., AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO A HIGHER BIDDER UNDER INVITATION NO. IFB-156-237-59 BY PROCUREMENT OFFICIALS OF THE SUPPLY DEPARTMENT, NAVAL AIR MATERIAL CENTER, NAVAL CENTER, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. RECEIPT IS ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED OF YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 8, 1959.

THE INVITATION SOLICITED BIDS FOR FURNISHING TWO BORING AND MILLING MACHINES IN ACCORDANCE WITH BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS INDUSTRIAL RESERVE SPECIFICATION NO. 58-25 AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED TO THE INVITATION FOR BIDS. PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS WERE ADVISED IN THE INVITATION THAT DELIVERY OF THE TWO MACHINES WAS REQUIRED TO BE MADE WITHIN EIGHT WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THE CONTRACT. BIDS WERE OPENED ON FEBRUARY 25, 1959. IS REPORTED THAT, PRIOR TO THE OPENING OF BIDS, THERE HAD BEEN RECEIVED A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 3, 1959, FROM DELAWARE VALLEY MACHINERY, INC., REQUESTING CERTAIN CHANGES IN THE

SPECIFICATIONS, PARTICULARLY PARAGRAPH 3.27.1, DEPTH CONTROL, SO THAT IT COULD SUBMIT A BID WITHOUT EXCEPTION TO THE SPECIFICATIONS. IN RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST, THE PROCURING AGENCY ADVISED THAT THE CHANGES IN THE SPECIFICATIONS REQUESTED REQUIREMENTS AND THAT, THEREFORE, THE SUGGESTED CHANGES COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PROCUREMENT IN QUESTION. SUBSEQUENTLY, DELAWARE VALLEY MACHINERY, INC., SUBMITTED ITS BID OFFERING TO FURNISH TWO LUCAS MODEL NO. 41B48'S HORIZONTAL BORING AND MILLING MACHINES AT THE UNIT PRICES SET FORTH THEREIN. WITH ITS BID THE CORPORATION SUBMITTED A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 24, 1959, IN WHICH IT POINTED OUT THAT IT COULD NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF PARAGRAPH 3.27.1, DEPTH CONTROL, OF THE SPECIFICATIONS, WHICH CALLED FOR A ,ROTATING TURRET BAR," FOR THE REASON THAT THIS ATTACHMENT WAS A PATENTED FEATURE OFFERED BY THE DEVLIEG MACHINE COMPANY AND, THEREFORE, OBVIOUSLY COULD NOT BE OFFERED BY ANY OTHER MANUFACTURER. THE BID OF DELAWARE VALLEY MACHINERY, INC., WAS LOW BUT WAS REJECTED AS NOT CONFORMING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARD WAS MADE ON APRIL 20, 1959, TO THE ONLY OTHER BIDDER, W. E. SHIPLEY MACHINERY COMPANY, WHO OFFERED TO FURNISH TWO DEVLIEG NO. 3P 48, SPIRAMATIC JIG MILLS, AT THE UNIT PRICES SET FORTH IN ITS BID. IT IS REPORTED THAT ONE OF THE TWO MACHINES WAS SHIPPED BY THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER ON MAY 19, 1959.

IN THEIR LETTER OF MAY 6, 1959, TO OUR OFFICE, LUCAS MACHINE DIVISION OF THE NEW BRITAIN MACHINE COMPANY AND DELAWARE VALLEY MACHINERY, INC., CONTEND THAT THE LUCAS BORING MACHINE CAN AND DOES ACCOMPLISH THE NECESSARY END RESULT CALLED FOR IN PARAGRAPH 3.27.1 OF THE SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT THEIR BID SHOULD NOT BEEN REJECTED BECAUSE THE MACHINE OFFERED BY THEM DID NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED ROTATING TURRET BAR.

IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT OF MAY 14, 1959, IT IS STATED THAT THE BID OF DELAWARE VALLEY MACHINERY, INC., WAS REJECTED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:

"12. TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EQUIPMENT OFFERED BY DELAWARE VALLEY DISCLOSED THAT THE LUCAS MACHINES WHICH WERE OFFERED DID NOT CONFORM TO THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATION, AND THIS BID WAS THEREFORE CONSIDERED TO BE NON-RESPONSIVE. SOME OF THE SIGNIFICANT DEVIATIONS FROM THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENT ARE DETAILED BELOW:

"/A) SPEC. PARAGRAPH 3.27.1--- DEPTH CONTROL: THE MECHANISM SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A BAR FEED DEPTH CONTROL ATTACHMENT CONSISTING OF A ROTATING TURRET BAR CARRYING AT LEAST TWELVE ADJUSTABLE STOPS WHICH CAN BE SET TO TRIP THE BAR FEED AUTOMATICALLY AT ANY DESIRED POSITION. THE DEPTH CONTROL SHALL PERMIT ACCURATE DUPLICATION OF PRODUCTION WORK INVOLVING MULTIPLE COUNTERBORING, FACING OR BACK FACING OPERATIONS TO CLOSE LIMITS.

"DELAWARE VALLEY BID: THE LUCAS MACHINE OFFERED HAS A PROGRAM BAR WITH 6 SLOTS, HAVING TWO ABUTMENTS FOR EACH SLOT. ONE ABUTMENT IN EACH SLOT IS USED FOR DEPTH BORING IN THE OUTFEED DIRECTION AND THE OTHER FOR BACK SPOT FACING IN THE INFEE DIRECTION.

"THE PROGRAM BAR LIMITS THE CAPACITY OF THE MACHINE BY PROVIDING ONLY 6 STOPS WHICH CAN BE POSITIONED FOR INFEE, AND 6 STOPS FOR OUTFEED. THIS WAS CONFIRMED BY MR. VILLWOCK OF LUCAS MACHINE COMPANY DURING CONFERENCE AT NAVAL AIR MATERIAL CENTER PURCHASE DIVISION ON 27 APRIL 1959, AND IN DELAWARE VALLEY LETTER OF 3 FEBRUARY 1959, ENCLOSURE (2). IT WILL ALSO BE NOTED THAT DELAWARE VALLEY, IN THEIR LETTER OF 24 FEBRUARY 1959, ENCLOSURE (4), STATED THAT THE MACHINE THEY OFFERED "MEETS ALL OTHER MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DETAILS REQUESTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS"

"COMMENT BY NAVAL AIR MATERIAL CENTER TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT: ROTATING TURRET STOPS HAVE BEEN USED SUCCESSFULLY FOR MANY YEARS ON ENGINE LATHES, TURRET LATHES, DRILL PRESSES, BORING AND MILLING MACHINES. THEY PROVIDE A SIMPLE ACCURATE, TROUBLE-FREE MEANS FOR OBTAINING THE DESIRED RESULTS BY INHERENT DESIGN OF CONSTANTLY MAINTAINING AN EQUALLY SPACED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE STOP ELEMENTS AND ITS CENTRAL SUPPORT.

"/B) SPEC. PARAGRAPH 3.8--- BED: THE BED-WAYS SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT DIMENSIONS TO FULLY SUPPORT THE SADDLE AND TABLE, AND MAINTAIN POSITION REGARDLESS OF WEIGHT OF WORKPIECE WHEN TABLE IS AT ANY POINT WITHIN ITS COMPLETE TRAVEL RANGE.

"DELAWARE VALLEY BID: THE LUCAS MACHINES OFFERED DO NOT PROVIDE FULL TABLE SUPPORT. THEIR MACHINE HAS A TABLE 50 INCHES LONG, WHICH OPERATES ON WAYS 78 INCHES LONG. IN ORDER TO OBTAIN FULL USE OF THE TABLE SIZE IT WILL OVERHANG THE WAYS AT LEAST 11 INCHES AT EACH END OF ITS TRAVEL. THIS PROVIDES APPROXIMATELY 20 PERCENT LESS THAN FULL SUPPORT OVER THE WAYS

"/C) SPEC. PARAGRAPH 3.9--- SADDLE: THE SADDLE SHALL HAVE SLIDE WAYS OF SUCH PROPORTIONS AS TO ASSURE ADEQUATE SUPPORT AND ACCURATE TABLE TRAVEL.

"DELAWARE VALLEY BID: THE LUCAS MACHINE OFFERED HAS A SADDLE MOUNTED ON VERY NARROW WAYS, BUT IS PROVIDED WITH ADDITIONAL OUTER SUPPORT. THESE OUTER SUPPORTS EXTEND THE BEARING POINTS TO 48 INCHES WIDTH. IN ORDER TO OBTAIN FULL USE OF THE TABLE SIZE IT WILL OVERHANG THE OUTER SUPPORT BEARING BY OVER 50 PERCENT OF ITS LENGTH.

"/D) SPEC. PARAGRAPH 3.16--- AUTOMATIC POSITIONING: THE MACHINE SHALL AUTOMATICALLY RELEASE THE TENSION OF THE SCREWS AND MECHANISMS SO THAT APPLICATION OF THE LOCKS WILL SECURE THE SLIDES IN THEIR SELECTED POSITION.

"DELAWARE VALLEY BID: THEY OFFER NO TENSION RELEASE BUT STATE "THE LUCAS DESIGN DOES NOT PERMIT EXCESSIVE TENSION IN THE SCREWS.'

"/E) SPEC.--- PAGE 10, DATA SHEET A, UNIT 1, AND PAGE 12, DATA SHEET B, UNIT 2: RAPID TRAVERSE RATE, HIGH (APPROX.) .... 150 IPM DELAWARE VALLEY BID: ........................................... 75 IPM NAVAL AIR MATERIAL CENTER NOTE: THIS WOULD INCREASE TRAVERSING TIME UP TO 100 PERCENT.'

THE DRAFTING OF PROPER SPECIFICATIONS REFLECTING THE ACTUAL NEEDS OF THE GOVERNMENT IS A FUNCTION OF THE PROCURING AGENCY. 17 COMP. GEN. 554. WHILE THE LAW CONTEMPLATES FAIR AND UNRESTRICTED COMPETITION, THE MERE FACT THAT A PARTICULAR BIDDER MAY NOT BE ABLE TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF AN INVITATION IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A CONCLUSION THAT THE SPECIFICATIONS ARE UNDULY RESTRICTIVE. 30 COMP. GEN. 368. OTHER WORDS, THE PROCURING AGENCY CANNOT BE REQUIRED TO ADVERTISE ON THE BASIS OF SPECIFICATIONS REFLECTING SOMETHING LESS THAN ITS BONA FIDE REQUIREMENTS SIMPLY TO EXPAND COMPETITION. 36 COMP. GEN. 251. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF A SHOWING THAT THE SPECIFICATIONS DID NOT IN FACT REPRESENT A BONA FIDE DETERMINATION OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ACTUAL REQUIREMENTS, THERE APPEARS NO BASIS UPON WHICH WE CAN OBJECT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TAKEN IN THE MATTER.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs