B-147384, DEC. 1, 1961

B-147384: Dec 1, 1961

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

IN THE ENCLOSURE TO YOUR LETTER IT IS STATED THAT REQUESTS MADE TO THE CONTRACTING AGENCY FOR PRINTS AND DRAWINGS WERE REFERRED TO THE GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AND THAT FIRM REFUSED ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT WAS NOT THEIR POLICY TO FURNISH SUCH MATERIAL TO OUTSIDE VENDORS. YOU CONTEND THAT NO AWARD SHOULD BE MADE UNTIL ALL PROSPECTIVE SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED THE NECESSARY SPECIFICATIONS. WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE THAT THE PROCUREMENT WAS NEGOTIATED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF 10 U.S.C. 2304 (A) 10 WHICH PERMITS PROCURING WITHOUT ADVERTISING WHEN IT IS IMPRACTICABLE TO OBTAIN COMPETITION. NEGOTIATION WAS USED BECAUSE. PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS WERE AVAILABLE. THE NEED FOR THE ITEM WAS TOO IMMEDIATE TO PERMIT OF PREPARATION OF SUCH MATERIAL.

B-147384, DEC. 1, 1961

TO PHOTEK ELECTRONICS, INCORPORATED:

WE REFER AGAIN TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 5, 1961, WITH ENCLOSURE, CONCERNING YOUR INABILITY TO OBTAIN PRINTS AND DRAWINGS NECESSARY FOR THE SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 33-604- 62-1511 ISSUED SEPTEMBER 7, 1961, BY THE DAYTON AIR FORCE DEPOT FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS. IN THE ENCLOSURE TO YOUR LETTER IT IS STATED THAT REQUESTS MADE TO THE CONTRACTING AGENCY FOR PRINTS AND DRAWINGS WERE REFERRED TO THE GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AND THAT FIRM REFUSED ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT WAS NOT THEIR POLICY TO FURNISH SUCH MATERIAL TO OUTSIDE VENDORS. YOU CONTEND THAT NO AWARD SHOULD BE MADE UNTIL ALL PROSPECTIVE SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED THE NECESSARY SPECIFICATIONS.

WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE THAT THE PROCUREMENT WAS NEGOTIATED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF 10 U.S.C. 2304 (A) 10 WHICH PERMITS PROCURING WITHOUT ADVERTISING WHEN IT IS IMPRACTICABLE TO OBTAIN COMPETITION. NEGOTIATION WAS USED BECAUSE, AS STATED ON PAGE 1 OF THE SCHEDULE, NO DRAWINGS, PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS WERE AVAILABLE, AND THE NEED FOR THE ITEM WAS TOO IMMEDIATE TO PERMIT OF PREPARATION OF SUCH MATERIAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE ITEMS COULD BE IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ONLY BY FEDERAL STOCK NUMBER AND THE IDENTIFICATION EMPLOYED BY GENERAL ELECTRIC WHICH HAD PREVIOUSLY SUPPLIED THE ITEMS. THE FOUR PROPOSALS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST WERE FROM FIRMS WHICH HAD FURNISHED THE ITEMS TO GENERAL ELECTRIC AND, THEREFORE, WERE FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIREMENTS.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT FURNISHED TO US INDICATES THAT AN EXTENSIVE SEARCH WAS MADE TO OBTAIN DETAILED DRAWINGS FOR THE ITEMS WITHOUT SUCCESS. IN VIEW OF THE UNAVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATE SPECIFICATIONS AND THE AUTHORITY TO PROCURE BY NEGOTIATION IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO LEGAL BASIS TO QUESTION THE ACTION OF THE PROCURING AGENCY IN THIS MATTER.