B-156359, JUN. 2, 1965

B-156359: Jun 2, 1965

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

THE EFFECT OF SUCH FAILURE WAS TO CHANGE YOUR LOW PROPOSED PRICE TO OTHER THAN LOW UPON THE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSALS IN THE LIGHT OF GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION COSTS FROM ORIGIN POINTS TO DESTINATION POINTS DETERMINED AFTER RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS. PARAGRAPH 7 (D) OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PROVIDED: "IT IS CONTEMPLATED THAT A CONTRACT WILL BE AWARDED TO THAT RESPONSIBLE OFFEROR WHOSE PROPOSAL WILL BE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. ADVISED OFFERORS: "/1) EACH BID WILL BE EVALUATED TO THE DESTINATION SPECIFIED BY ADDING TO THE F.O.B. THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM SHIPPING WEIGHTS (AND DIMENSIONS IF APPLICABLE) ARE REQUIRED FOR DETERMINATION OF TRANSPORTATION COSTS.

B-156359, JUN. 2, 1965

TO AIR LOGISTICS CORPORATION:

BY TELEFAX DATED MARCH 19, 1965, YOU PROTESTED AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO THE SPACE CORPORATION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 33-657-65-5052, ISSUED ON JANUARY 22, 1965, FOR 22 TYPE A/M375-6 AIRCRAFT ENGINE TEST STANDS AND ANCILLARY ITEMS ON AN F.O.B. ORIGIN BASIS.

YOU PROTESTED ON THE BASIS THAT THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FAILED TO STATE DELIVERY DESTINATION POINTS, ACTUAL OR ARBITRARILY SELECTED, FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVALUATING BIDS AS REQUIRED BY 1-1305.5, ARMED SERVICES PROCUREMENT REGULATIONS (ASPR). THE EFFECT OF SUCH FAILURE WAS TO CHANGE YOUR LOW PROPOSED PRICE TO OTHER THAN LOW UPON THE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSALS IN THE LIGHT OF GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION COSTS FROM ORIGIN POINTS TO DESTINATION POINTS DETERMINED AFTER RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS.

PARAGRAPH 7 (D) OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PROVIDED:

"IT IS CONTEMPLATED THAT A CONTRACT WILL BE AWARDED TO THAT RESPONSIBLE OFFEROR WHOSE PROPOSAL WILL BE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT, PRICE AND OTHER FACTORS CONSIDERED.'

FORM AFPI 71-75, ATTACHED TO THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, ADVISED OFFERORS:

"/1) EACH BID WILL BE EVALUATED TO THE DESTINATION SPECIFIED BY ADDING TO THE F.O.B. ORIGIN PRICE ALL TRANSPORTATION COSTS TO SAID DESTINATION. THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM SHIPPING WEIGHTS (AND DIMENSIONS IF APPLICABLE) ARE REQUIRED FOR DETERMINATION OF TRANSPORTATION COSTS. BIDDER MUST STATE THE WEIGHTS (AND DIMENSIONS IF APPLICABLE) IN HIS BID OR IT WILL BE REJECTED. IF DELIVERED ITEMS EXCEED THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM SHIPPING WEIGHTS (AND DIMENSIONS IF APPLICABLE), THE BIDDER AGREES THAT THE CONTRACT PRICE SHALL BE REDUCED BY AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TRANSPORTATION COSTS COMPUTED FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES BASED ON BIDDER'S GUARANTEED MAXIMUM SHIPPING WEIGHTS (AND DIMENSIONS IF APPLICABLE) AND THE TRANSPORTATION COSTS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR BID EVALUATION PURPOSES BASED ON CORRECT SHIPPING DATA. (ASPR 2-201 (B) (XIII), MAY 1961)

"/2) AFPI FORM 28A, ATTACHED HERETO AND HEREBY MADE A PART HEREOF, MUST BE COMPLETED BY THE BIDDER.'

FORM AFPI 28A REQUIRED OFFERORS TO FURNISH APPROPRIATE TRANSPORTATION DATA SUCH AS LOAD FACILITIES, FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION DATA, TYPE OF PACKAGING, WEIGHT, CUBIC MEASUREMENT, ETC.

THE AIR FORCE HAS REPORTED THAT NEITHER THE EXACT LOCATIONS NOR THE GENERAL LOCATIONS OF THE DESTINATIONS OF THE ITEMS BEING PROCURED WERE KNOWN TO THE PROCUREMENT OFFICE AT THE TIME PROPOSALS WERE SOLICITED OR AT THE TIME PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED. IT IS FURTHER REPORTED THAT THE PROCUREMENT OFFICE WAS NOT ADVISED OF THE ACTUAL DESTINATIONS OF THE ITEMS UNTIL AFTER PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED. AFTER COMPUTATION OF THE APPLICABLE TRANSPORTATION FROM PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, YOUR F.O.B. ORIGIN POINT, TO THE DESTINATIONS NAMED, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT YOUR TOTAL PROPOSED PRICE SHOULD BE INCREASED, FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES, BY $20,095.20 TO REFLECT TRANSPORTATION COSTS TO THE GOVERNMENT. AS A RESULT OF APPLICATION OF THIS EVALUATION FACTOR, YOUR PROPOSAL WAS DISPLACED BY THAT OF THE SPACE CORPORATION. ACCORDINGLY, AWARD WAS MADE TO THAT OFFEROR ON MARCH 9, 1965, AS THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE OFFEROR "PRICE AND OTHER FACTORS CONSIDERED.' 40 COMP. GEN. 160; 39 ID. 684; 37 ID. 162; 10 ID. 402.

THE REQUIREMENT IN ASPR 1-1305.5 THAT WHEN EXACT DESTINATIONS ARE UNKNOWN BUT GENERAL LOCATIONS OF DESTINATIONS ARE KNOWN, A DEFINITE PLACE OR PLACES SHALL BE DESIGNATED AS THE POINTS TO WHICH TRANSPORTATION COSTS WILL BE COMPUTED FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES, WAS NOT FOR APPLICATION HERE WHERE NOT EVEN GENERAL LOCATIONS WERE KNOWN TO THE PROCUREMENT OFFICE WHEN IT ISSUED AND RECEIVED PROPOSALS. ALL OFFERORS WERE ON NOTICE THAT TRANSPORTATION COSTS WOULD BE A FACTOR IN DETERMINING THE PROPOSAL MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT, AND IT APPEARS THAT PROPOSALS WERE EVALUATED ON THE SAME BASIS WHEN THE DESTINATIONS BECAME KNOWN TO THE PROCUREMENT OFFICE. THUS, IT MAY NOT BE SAID THAT OFFERORS WERE PREJUDICED WHEN THEIR PROPOSALS WERE EQUALLY EVALUATED ON THE BASIS OF THE KNOWN DESTINATIONS SPECIFIED AFTER RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS.

ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO LEGAL BASIS TO QUESTION THE AWARD MADE TO THE SPACE CORPORATION.