B-150859, APR. 18, 1963

B-150859: Apr 18, 1963

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 15. DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE EQUIPMENT WERE SET OUT IN THE INVITATION. BIDDERS WERE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT WITH THEIR BIDS "A LIST OF THE MAJOR COMPONENTS GIVING MANUFACTURER AND CATALOG DESCRIPTION.'. THIS INFORMATION WAS TO BE USED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE EQUIPMENT BEING OFFERED COMPLIED WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS. SIX BIDS WERE RECEIVED. 850 WAS REJECTED BECAUSE THE EQUIPMENT OFFERED DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS. 750 WAS THE SECOND LOWEST BID RECEIVED. YOUR BID AND THE THIRD LOWEST BID WERE REJECTED BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO FURNISH THE MANUFACTURER AND CATALOG DESCRIPTION OF THE STEERING CONSOLE. THE FOURTH LOWEST BID WAS REJECTED BECAUSE IT WAS INCOMPLETE AND THE SUPPLIES OFFERED DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS.

B-150859, APR. 18, 1963

TO UNION MACHINE WORKS, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 15, 1963, PROTESTING THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANOTHER BIDDER UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 251- 270-63 ISSUED BY THE PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD, BREMERTON, WASHINGTON.

THE INVITATION SOLICITED BIDS--- TO BE OPENED JANUARY 4, 1963--- FOR FURNISHING THE STEERING GEAR MECHANISM FOR THE AS-34. DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE EQUIPMENT WERE SET OUT IN THE INVITATION. PAGE TWO OF THE SCHEDULE INVITED THE ATTENTION OF BIDDERS TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ,DATA TO BE SUBMITTED WITH BIDS" APPEARING ON PAGE 24, AND TO THE "REQUIREMENT FOR DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE" APPEARING ON PAGE 25 OF THE INVITATION. BIDDERS WERE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT WITH THEIR BIDS "A LIST OF THE MAJOR COMPONENTS GIVING MANUFACTURER AND CATALOG DESCRIPTION.' THIS INFORMATION WAS TO BE USED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE EQUIPMENT BEING OFFERED COMPLIED WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS. SIX BIDS WERE RECEIVED. THE LOW BID IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,850 WAS REJECTED BECAUSE THE EQUIPMENT OFFERED DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS. YOUR BID IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,750 WAS THE SECOND LOWEST BID RECEIVED. YOUR BID AND THE THIRD LOWEST BID WERE REJECTED BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO FURNISH THE MANUFACTURER AND CATALOG DESCRIPTION OF THE STEERING CONSOLE, THE SPECIFICATIONS PERTAINING THERETO BEING SET FORTH ON PAGES 17 TO 20 OF THE INVITATION. THE FOURTH LOWEST BID WAS REJECTED BECAUSE IT WAS INCOMPLETE AND THE SUPPLIES OFFERED DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS. HYDE WINDLASS COMPANY WAS THE FIFTH LOWEST BIDDER AND SINCE ITS BID WAS RESPONSIVE IT WAS AWARDED THE CONTRACT. HOWEVER, BEFORE IT WAS AWARDED THE CONTRACT AND AFTER IT HAD BEEN DETERMINED TO BE THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER THE PRICE WAS NEGOTIATED DOWNWARD TO $40,294.

IN YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 15, 1963, YOU STATE IN EFFECT THAT THE REMOTE STEERING CONTROL CONSOLE IS NOT A MAJOR COMPONENT OF THE PROCUREMENT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF COST OR SIZE. IT IS NOTED FROM YOUR LETTER, PARTICULARLY PARAGRAPH 4, PAGE 2, THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE CONSOLE ENCLOSURE AND NOT TO THE CONSOLE AS A WHOLE. YOU STATE IN EFFECT, PRESUMABLY REFERRING TO THE ENCLOSURE, THAT YOU ARE THE MANUFACTURER OF THIS CONSOLE. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REPORTS HOWEVER THAT THE REMOTE STEERING CONTROL CONSOLE IS MADE UP OF MANY MINOR COMPONENTS. IT IS REPORTED THAT THE CONSOLE "IS MADE UP OF, AMONG OTHER THINGS, SERVO- SYNCHROS, RUDDER INDICATORS, A NUMBER OF SWITCHES AND A RATHER EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF WIRING.' ALSO, IT IS STATED THAT PAST EXPERIENCE OF THE PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD HAS INDICATED THAT IN A PROCUREMENT OF THIS TYPE THE COST OF THE REMOTE STEERING WHEEL CONTROL CONSOLE AMOUNTS TO 22 PERCENT TO 29 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL COST. AND WHILE IT IS ADMITTED THAT YOU COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF LISTING MAJOR COMPONENTS AND THEIR MANUFACTURERS, AS EVIDENCED BY YOUR DRAWING D 62-449-1, EXCEPT AS TO THE REMOTE STEERING CONTROL CONSOLE, WE WOULD NOT BE WARRANTED IN DISAGREEING WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE'S VIEW THAT THE ITEM IN QUESTION WAS A MAJOR COMPONENT AND SINCE YOU HAD FAILED TO LIST THE MANUFACTURER OF THE CONSOLE AS SUCH, YOUR BID WAS NONRESPONSIVE.

WITH REGARD TO YOUR ALLEGATION THAT ON AN IDENTICAL BID INVITATION, IFB 251/494/62, YOUR IDENTICAL PROPOSAL WAS NOT DISQUALIFIED AS NONRESPONSIVE, THE RECORD INDICATES THAT THE INVITATION IN THAT CASE INVITED BIDS ON TWO BASES. ITEM 1 CALLED FOR UNASSEMBLED STEERING GEAR MACHINERY AND ITEM 2 CALLED FOR STEERING GEAR MACHINERY AS A PACKAGE UNIT EXCEPT FOR REMOTE CONTROL AND BULKHEAD MOUNTED EQUIPMENT. AWARD WAS TO BE MADE ON EITHER ONE OF THE ITEMS WHICHEVER WAS CONSIDERED TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT. AWARD WAS MADE TO THE LOW BIDDER ON ITEM 1 SINCE THE ADDITIONAL COST FOR ITEM 2 WAS NOT CONSIDERED JUSTIFIED. YOU WERE NOT THE LOW BIDDER ON ITEM 1 AND THEREFORE NO TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF YOUR BID WAS MADE.

ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANYTHING WHICH INDICATES THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ACTED IMPROPERLY IN MAKING AWARD OF THE CONTRACT IN THIS CASE.