B-144028, NOV. 7, 1960
Highlights
JACK HOLLINGSWORTH: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 16. WE HAVE ASCERTAINED THAT YOUR BID ON ITEM 8 WAS REJECTED FOR FAILURE OF THE SAMPLE FURNISHED BY YOUR COMPANY TO MEET THE INVITATION REQUIREMENT THAT THE SOLDERLESS TERMINAL INSULATION BE BONDED TO THE INSULATION GRIP SLEEVE. OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION STAFF TO THE CONTRACTING SECTION SUGGESTING OTHER GROUNDS FOR REJECTION WAS AN INTERNAL OFFICE DOCUMENT FOR THE INFORMATIONAL USE OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ONLY AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN WERE NOT COMPLETELY ADOPTED BY HIM NOR INTENDED TO BE DISTRIBUTED AS THE REASON FOR BID REJECTION. WHILE YOUR PRICE AND THAT OF THE OTHER BIDDERS OFFERING YOUR MANUFACTURED PRODUCT WERE LOWER THAN THE PRICE ACCEPTED.
B-144028, NOV. 7, 1960
TO MR. JACK HOLLINGSWORTH:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1960, PROTESTING AGAINST THE REJECTION OF YOUR BID FOR ITEMS 8 AND 10, THE ONLY ITEMS YOU BID UPON, UNDER INVITATION 4-61-752.
WE HAVE ASCERTAINED THAT YOUR BID ON ITEM 8 WAS REJECTED FOR FAILURE OF THE SAMPLE FURNISHED BY YOUR COMPANY TO MEET THE INVITATION REQUIREMENT THAT THE SOLDERLESS TERMINAL INSULATION BE BONDED TO THE INSULATION GRIP SLEEVE. THE REPORT OF AUGUST 10, 1960, OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION STAFF TO THE CONTRACTING SECTION SUGGESTING OTHER GROUNDS FOR REJECTION WAS AN INTERNAL OFFICE DOCUMENT FOR THE INFORMATIONAL USE OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ONLY AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN WERE NOT COMPLETELY ADOPTED BY HIM NOR INTENDED TO BE DISTRIBUTED AS THE REASON FOR BID REJECTION.
WITH RESPECT TO THE SOLDERLESS TERMINAL DESCRIBED IN ITEM 10 OF THE INVITATION, WHILE YOUR PRICE AND THAT OF THE OTHER BIDDERS OFFERING YOUR MANUFACTURED PRODUCT WERE LOWER THAN THE PRICE ACCEPTED, AND THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION STAFF RECOMMENDED AGAINST ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRODUCT OF YOUR MANUFACTURE BECAUSE IT WOULD NECESSITATE MODIFICATION OF EXISTING WORK TOOLS, THE PRIMARY BASIS UPON WHICH THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MADE THE AWARD TO THE SUPPLIER OF THE OTHER NINE ITEMS WAS THAT IT WAS MORE IN THE INTEREST OF ECONOMY TO THE GOVERNMENT TO MAKE A SINGLE AWARD FOR THE ENTIRE INVITATION. THEREFORE, HE ELECTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF INVITATION SPECIAL PROVISION "EVALUATION AND AWARD OF CONTRACT," RESERVING TO THE GOVERNMENT THE RIGHT TO AWARD THE ENTIRE CONTRACT TO ONE BIDDER.
AWARDS UNDER FORMAL ADVERTISING PROCEDURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE MADE TO THE RESPONSIBLE BIDDER WHOSE BID CONFORMS TO THE INVITATION FOR BIDS AND IS MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT PRICE AND OTHER FACTORS CONSIDERED. SINCE YOUR SAMPLE UNDER ITEM 8 DID NOT CONFORM TO THE INVITATION REQUIREMENT AND AN OVER-ALL AWARD TO ONE BIDDER FOR ALL TEN ITEMS, INSTEAD OF AN AWARD TO ONE BIDDER FOR NINE ITEMS AND TO ANOTHER BIDDER FOR THE TENTH ITEM, HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TO BE IN THE GOVERNMENT'S INTEREST AND IS AN OPTION RESERVED WITHIN THE TERMS OF THE INVITATION, WE WILL NOT OBJECT TO THE AWARD MADE.