B-159258, SEP. 28, 1966

B-159258: Sep 28, 1966

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TO TRIO-TECH INCORPORATED: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM OF MAY 24. SEE CONDITION 4 ON REVERSE SIDE ENTITLED "LATE OFFERS AND MODIFICATIONS OR WITHDRAWALS" WHICH PROVIDES THAT LATE OFFERS AND MODIFICATIONS OR WITHDRAWALS THEREOF SENT THROUGH THE MAILS ORDINARILY WILL BE CONSIDERED ONLY IF TIMELY MAILED BY REGISTERED MAIL OR BY CERTIFIED MAIL FOR WHICH A POSTMARKED RECEIPT HAS BEEN OBTAINED AS SPECIFIED.'. THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT WAS SYNOPSIZED IN THE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY ON FEBRUARY 28. IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT AN AWARD BE MADE TO YOU. YOU WERE FORWARDED. IT WAS THEREAFTER ADMINISTRATIVELY DETERMINED THAT YOUR PROPOSAL WAS "LATE" AND THAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED.

B-159258, SEP. 28, 1966

TO TRIO-TECH INCORPORATED:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM OF MAY 24, AND YOUR LETTERS OF MAY 27 AND JULY 8, 1966, AND ENCLOSURES, REGARDING YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO SCHAEVITZ ENGINEERING UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. SA-6-66361, ISSUED BY KELLY AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS.

PAGE 6 OF THE RFP STATED THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROCUREMENT TO BE: "CENTRIFUGE SYSTEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SANE EXHIBIT 164 ATTACHED. (SCHAEVITZ MODEL 263-8-150-PM).'

PARAGRAPH 7 OF FORM DD 1491, JUNE 1, 1964, PROVIDED THAT OFFERS FOR THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT WOULD BE RECEIVED UNTIL 4:45 P.M., C.S.T., FEBRUARY 28, 1966. WITH RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF LATE OFFERS THIS PARAGRAPH STATED AS FOLLOWS:

"CAUTION TO OFFERORS - LATE OFFERS. SEE CONDITION 4 ON REVERSE SIDE ENTITLED "LATE OFFERS AND MODIFICATIONS OR WITHDRAWALS" WHICH PROVIDES THAT LATE OFFERS AND MODIFICATIONS OR WITHDRAWALS THEREOF SENT THROUGH THE MAILS ORDINARILY WILL BE CONSIDERED ONLY IF TIMELY MAILED BY REGISTERED MAIL OR BY CERTIFIED MAIL FOR WHICH A POSTMARKED RECEIPT HAS BEEN OBTAINED AS SPECIFIED.'

THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT WAS SYNOPSIZED IN THE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY ON FEBRUARY 28, 1966, TO ADVISE SMALL BUSINESSES OF SUBCONTRACTING OPPORTUNITIES. ON MARCH 1, 1966, YOU REQUESTED A COPY OF AN APPLICABLE TECHNICAL EXHIBIT AND ON MARCH 2, 1966, YOU SUBMITTED YOUR PROPOSAL, WHICH OFFERED YOUR MODEL AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE SCHAEVITZ MODEL.

PURSUANT TO A PRE-AWARD SURVEY DATED APRIL 14, 1966, IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT AN AWARD BE MADE TO YOU. BY LETTER DATED APRIL 19, 1966, YOU WERE FORWARDED, AMONG OTHER ENCLOSURES, AN AWARD CONTRACT, FORM DD 1491, JUNE 1, 1964, WHICH HAD NOT BEEN SIGNED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITMENT DOCUMENT SIGNED BY J. C. LOBIT, BUYER, AND MARY C. HASTINGS, FUNDS CERTIFYING OFFICER.

THE RECORD INDICATES THAT ON APRIL 27, 1966, THE PROCURING ACTIVITY RECEIVED FORM DD 1491, WHICH HAD BEEN SIGNED BY YOUR REPRESENTATIVE ON APRIL 25, 1966. IT WAS THEREAFTER ADMINISTRATIVELY DETERMINED THAT YOUR PROPOSAL WAS "LATE" AND THAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. AWARD WAS MADE TO SCHAEVITZ ON MAY 19, 1966. BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 24, 1966, HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, ADVISED OUR OFFICE THAT AS OF AUGUST 12, 1966, SCHAEVITZ HAD MADE SHIPMENT OF THE SYSTEM REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT.

WHILE WE MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE ACTION TAKEN IN THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT, THE FACT IS THAT PERFORMANCE UNDER THE CONTRACT AWARDED TO SCHAEVITZ HAS BEEN FULLY COMPLETED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE IS NO FURTHER ACTION OUR OFFICE CAN TAKE WITH RESPECT TO SCHAEVITZ'S CONTRACT. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HAS ADVISED THAT APPROPRIATE ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN TO AVOID A REPETITION OF THE INSTANT SITUATION IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO DENY YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE CONTRACT AWARDED TO SCHAEVITZ.