B-151885, SEP. 20, 1963

B-151885: Sep 20, 1963

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

THAT YOU WERE ENTITLED TO NEGOTIATE ANY MISUNDERSTANDINGS RELATIVE TO YOUR QUOTED PRICES AND FEE. WE HAVE REVIEWED THE RECORD OF THIS PROCUREMENT AND WE FIND NO BASIS TO DISTURB THE AWARD MADE TO LOCKHEED. AN ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSALS REVEALS THAT LOCKHEED'S PROPOSAL WAS THE LOWEST OVER-ALL OFFER RECEIVED. SINCE IT WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY CONCLUDED THAT LOCKHEED WOULD PERFORM IN A MANNER MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. NAS10-770 WAS AWARDED TO LOCKHEED ON JULY 1. YOUR SPECIFIC POINTS OF PROTEST ARE CONSIDERED IN THE ORDER PRESENTED ABOVE. 1. WE ARE ADVISED THAT LOCKHEED IS ENTIRELY CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THE REQUIRED MAINTENANCE ON THE AIRCRAFT. THIS IS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT LOCKHEED IS PRESENTLY UNDER CONTRACT WITH MATS FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ELEVEN C-140 JETSTAR AIRCRAFT AT ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE AND THAT LOCKHEED'S SERVICE BASE IN NEW YORK IS THE LARGEST MAINTENANCE SUPPORT CENTER FOR SUCH AIRCRAFT. 2.

B-151885, SEP. 20, 1963

TO CAPITAL AIRWAYS, INC:

BY LETTER DATED JUNE 24, 1963, YOU PROTESTED AGAINST THE AWARD MADE BY THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA) UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. Q-51-3 TO LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT SERVICE, INC., FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF LOCKHEED JETSTAR AIRCRAFT FROM JULY 1, 1963, TO JUNE 30, 1964.

YOU PROTEST AGAINST THIS AWARD ON THE FOLLOWING BASES:

1. THAT LOCKHEED CONTRACTED YOUR COMPANY IN AN EFFORT TO PURCHASE SPARE PARTS AND EQUIPMENT RELATED TO AND REQUIRED FOR PERFORMANCE OF THE PROPOSED CONTRACT;

2. THAT LOCKHEED'S ONLY ABILITY TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT CONSISTED MAINLY OF LOCKHEED'S ABILITY TO HIRE PERSONNEL EMPLOYED BY YOUR COMPANY ENGAGED IN OPERATIONS UNDER THE PRIOR FISCAL YEAR CONTRACT WITH YOUR COMPANY; AND

3. THAT YOU WERE ENTITLED TO NEGOTIATE ANY MISUNDERSTANDINGS RELATIVE TO YOUR QUOTED PRICES AND FEE.

WE HAVE REVIEWED THE RECORD OF THIS PROCUREMENT AND WE FIND NO BASIS TO DISTURB THE AWARD MADE TO LOCKHEED. WE NOTE THAT OUT OF EIGHT PROPOSALS RECEIVED, YOUR COMPANY RANKED FOURTH IN THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS. EVALUATION COMMITTEE COMPOSED OF QUALIFIED PERSONNEL DETERMINED, AFTER A CAREFUL REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF ALL PROPOSALS RECEIVED, THAT LOCKHEED SUBMITTED THE MOST ACCEPTABLE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND THAT AWARD SHOULD BE MADE TO THAT OFFEROR BASED ON A MORE ADVANTAGEOUS COST-PLUS-A-FIXED-FEE OFFER TO THE GOVERNMENT. AN ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSALS REVEALS THAT LOCKHEED'S PROPOSAL WAS THE LOWEST OVER-ALL OFFER RECEIVED, PRICE AND OTHER FACTORS CONSIDERED. SINCE IT WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY CONCLUDED THAT LOCKHEED WOULD PERFORM IN A MANNER MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT, CONTRACT NO. NAS10-770 WAS AWARDED TO LOCKHEED ON JULY 1, 1963, AT AN ESTIMATED COST, INCLUDING FIXED FEE, OF $211,183.12.

YOUR SPECIFIC POINTS OF PROTEST ARE CONSIDERED IN THE ORDER PRESENTED ABOVE.

1. WE ARE ADVISED THAT LOCKHEED IS ENTIRELY CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THE REQUIRED MAINTENANCE ON THE AIRCRAFT. THIS IS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT LOCKHEED IS PRESENTLY UNDER CONTRACT WITH MATS FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ELEVEN C-140 JETSTAR AIRCRAFT AT ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE AND THAT LOCKHEED'S SERVICE BASE IN NEW YORK IS THE LARGEST MAINTENANCE SUPPORT CENTER FOR SUCH AIRCRAFT.

2. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT LOCKHEED OFFERED A CHOICE OF TWO QUALIFIED OPERATION CREWS IN ADDITION TO THE CREW THEN EMPLOYED BY YOUR COMPANY, AND THAT DUE TO NASA PREFERENCE IT WAS AGREED THAT THE CREW OPERATING UNDER YOUR PAST CONTRACT WOULD ALSO OPERATE THE AIRCRAFT UNDER EMPLOYMENT LOCKHEED, IF POSSIBLE. IN THIS CONNECTION, WE NOTE THAT ALL SIX FIRMS SUBMITTING RESPONSIVE PROPOSALS OFFERED TO USE PERSONNEL EMPLOYED BY YOUR COMPANY FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE AIRCRAFT. ADDITIONALLY, WE NOTE THAT YOUR COMPANY'S PROPOSAL OFFERED TO USE PERSONNEL EMPLOYED BY LOCKHEED FOR BACKUP AND CREW RELIEF PURPOSES.

3. CONCERNING YOUR RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE PRICE AND FEE MISUNDERSTANDING, IT IS POINTED OUT THAT PARAGRAPH 4 OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ADVISED OFFERORS THAT THE GOVERNMENT RESERVED THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY OR ALL PROPOSALS OR TO NEGOTIATE WITH ANY SOURCE CONSIDERED BEST QUALIFIED. THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FURTHER ADVISED OFFERORS TO SUBMIT THEIR BEST PROPOSALS INITIALLY. THIS PROCEDURE IS INCONSONANCE WITH LAW AND REGULATIONS. 10 U.S.C. 2304 (G); CF. ASPR 3-805.1 (V) AND ASPR 3-805.2.