B-155312, JAN. 15, 1965

B-155312, JAN. 15, 1965

TO MANEY AIRCRAFT PARTS, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 1, 1964, PROTESTING THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO AERO TECH SERVICES, INCORPORATED, OF OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA, UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. OCPAS-7006, ISSUED JULY 17, 1964, BY THE OKLAHOMA CITY AIR MATERIAL AREA, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA.

THE RFP REQUESTED PROPOSALS, ON A TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE BASIS, FOR FURNISHING ALL REQUIRED LABOR, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND INDIRECT MATERIAL FOR THE OVERHAUL, REPAIR, MODIFICATION, TEST, PACKAGING AND PRESERVATION, REPORTS, AND RETURN TO THE GOVERNMENT IN A COMPLETELY SERVICEABLE CONDITION OF VARIOUS ITEMS OF AIR FORCE EQUIPMENT. PARAGRAPH 10 OF THE RFP PROVIDED FOR DESIGNATION OF THE PLANT OR PLANTS OF THE CONTRACTOR OR SUBCONTRACTOR FOR INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ALL SERVICES AND SERVICEABLE EQUIPMENT TO BE FURNISHED UNDER THE CONTRACT. PARAGRAPH E, EXHIBIT "2" OF THE RFP, RELATING TO REPRESENTATIONS BY THE OFFEROR, READS AS FOLLOWS:

"E. (I) THAT THE F.O.B. POINT OR POINTS WILL BE ...............

(II) THAT THE APPLICABLE RAILROAD IS: .........................

(NOTE: ALL EQUIPMENT DELIVERED TO THE GOVERNMENT SHALL BE F.O.B. CARS AND CARRIER'S EQUIPMENT AT THE CONTRACTOR'S FACILITY, WITH GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING, AS AUTHORIZED BY A GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE).'

THE FOLLOWING PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED:

TABLE

"CATLIN AVIATION CO. $29,425.00

AIR OVERHAUL, INC. 32,500.00

MANEY AIRCRAFT PARTS, INC. 23,016.00

AERO-TECH SERVICES, INC. 23,276.00"

UNDER PARAGRAPH E OF EXHIBIT "2," YOU SHOWED WARNER ROBINS, GEORGIA, AS YOUR F.O.B. POINT, AND AERO TECH SHOWED OKLAHOMA CITY. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE EVALUATION OF THE OFFERS, THERE WERE ADDED THE NECESSARY FREIGHT COSTS TO AND FROM TINKER AFB WITH THE FOLLOWING RESULTS:

TABLE

"AERO-TECH SERVICES, INC. $23,276.00

FREIGHT (BOTH WAYS) 2,738.42

$26,014.42

MANEY AIRCRAFT PARTS, INC. $23,016.00

FREIGHT (BOTH WAYS) 13,541.92

$36,557.92"

ON THE BASIS OF ITS LOW PROPOSAL, TRANSPORTATION COSTS CONSIDERED, AERO TECH WAS AWARDED THE CONTRACT. IN THIS CONNECTION, WE ARE ADVISED BY HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, THAT SINCE THE ROUND TRIP BETWEEN OKLAHOMA CITY, THE LOCATION OF AERO TECH'S PLANT, AND TINKER AFB IS ONLY 25 MILES, GOVERNMENT-OWNED TRUCKS WILL BE USED TO TRANSPORT THE GOVERNMENT -FURNISHED PROPERTY, THEREBY MAKING THE ACTUAL COST TO THE GOVERNMENT $23,476.20 ($23,276.00 PLUS $200.20), OR $13,081.72 LESS THAN YOUR OFFER PLUS TRANSPORTATION CHARGES.

YOU STATE THAT SINCE THE RFP DID NOT INCLUDE ANY STATEMENT CONCERNING CONSIDERATION OF FREIGHT COSTS IN THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS, YOU CONCLUDED THAT SUCH FACTOR WOULD NOT ENTER INTO THE EVALUATION AND YOUR PROPOSAL WAS SUBMITTED ACCORDINGLY. THEREFORE, YOU CONTEND, THE AWARD TO AERO TECH SHOULD BE RESCINDED AND OFFERS SHOULD BE RESOLICITED "IN ORDER THAT ALL FACTORS FOR QUOTATION PURPOSES WILL BE EXPLICITLY OUTLINED IN THE BID TO MAKE THE COMPETITION FAIR AND EQUITABLE TO .'

WE HAVE HELD THAT AS A GENERAL RULE THE COST OF DELIVERY OF EQUIPMENT, ETC., IS ALWAYS A MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE GOVERNMENT IN DETERMINING WHICH IS IN FACT THE LOWEST BID RECEIVED. 10 COMP. GEN. 402, 404; 37 ID. 162. ARMED SERVICES PROCUREMENT REGULATION 1-1313.1 ALSO REQUIRES THAT CONTRACTING OFFICERS CONSIDER TRANSPORTATION RATES AND RELATED COSTS IN THE EVALUATION OF F.O.B. ORIGIN BIDS AND PROPOSALS.

WHILE THE RFP DID NOT SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT TRANSPORTATION COSTS WOULD BE A FACTOR IN THE EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS, IT WAS OBVIOUS FROM THE REQUIREMENT THAT REPAIRS BE MADE AT THE PLANT OR PLANTS OF THE CONTRACTOR OR SUBCONTRACTOR THAT TRANSPORTATION OF THE GOVERNMENT EQUIPMENT TO AND FROM TINKER AFB WOULD BE NECESSARY. FURTHERMORE, THE REQUEST FOR INDICATION OF AN F.O.B. ORIGIN POINT WAS NOTICE THAT SUCH INFORMATION WAS A MATERIAL PART OF THE OFFEROR'S PROPOSAL, AND THE DELIVERY TERMS ON WHICH PROPOSALS WERE REQUESTED CLEARLY IMPOSED UPON THE GOVERNMENT THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION. ANY DOUBT IN THE MATTER SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED BY DISCUSSION WITH THE CONTRACTING AGENCY.

IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE MUST CONCLUDE THAT TRANSPORTATION COSTS WERE PROPERLY INCLUDED IN THE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSALS IN QUESTION AND THAT SINCE AERO TECH'S PROPOSAL OFFERED THE LOWEST COST TO THE GOVERNMENT, BASED ON THE USE OF EITHER COMMERCIAL OR GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION, THE AWARD TO AERO TECH WAS PROPER. ACCORDINGLY, YOUR PROTEST IS DENIED.