B-167239, SEP. 3, 1969

B-167239: Sep 3, 1969

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER SERVICES OR PRODUCTS SHOULD BE OBTAINED UNDER CONTRACT OR THROUGH USE OF GOVERNMENT-OWNED FACILITIES AND PERSONNEL IS NOT MATTER OF A RULING IN TERMS OF LEGAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. THEREFORE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION BASED UPON DETAILED EVALUATION OF COSTS AND EXPERIENCE WILL NOT BE OBJECTED TO. TO BALDWIN TRASH COMPANY: THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 12. IN YOUR CORRESPONDENCE YOU CHARGE THAT THE PURCHASE AND PROPOSED UTILIZATION OF THIS EQUIPMENT IS ECONOMICALLY UNSOUND IN THAT THE EQUIPMENT BEING PURCHASED IS OBSOLETE AND INADEQUATE AND THAT GREATER EXPENDITURES WILL RESULT FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THESE SERVICES BY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WITH GOVERNMENT EQUIPMENT.

B-167239, SEP. 3, 1969

BID PROTEST - CONTRACT V GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT DECISION DENYING PROTEST OF BALDWIN TRASH CO. AGAINST PURCHASE OF REFUSE PICKUP TRUCKS AND "IN HOUSE" TRASH REMOVAL SERVICES BY NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY. A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER SERVICES OR PRODUCTS SHOULD BE OBTAINED UNDER CONTRACT OR THROUGH USE OF GOVERNMENT-OWNED FACILITIES AND PERSONNEL IS NOT MATTER OF A RULING IN TERMS OF LEGAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. THEREFORE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION BASED UPON DETAILED EVALUATION OF COSTS AND EXPERIENCE WILL NOT BE OBJECTED TO.

TO BALDWIN TRASH COMPANY:

THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 12, 1969, AND ENCLOSURE, PROTESTING THE PURCHASE OF REFUSE PICKUP TRUCKS FOR THE NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY (NCHA), AND THE USE OF SUCH EQUIPMENT TO PERFORM "IN HOUSE" TRASH REMOVAL SERVICES AT NCHA PROPERTIES RATHER THAN HAVING THE WORK PERFORMED BY CONTRACT TO NON-GOVERNMENT PARTIES.

IN YOUR CORRESPONDENCE YOU CHARGE THAT THE PURCHASE AND PROPOSED UTILIZATION OF THIS EQUIPMENT IS ECONOMICALLY UNSOUND IN THAT THE EQUIPMENT BEING PURCHASED IS OBSOLETE AND INADEQUATE AND THAT GREATER EXPENDITURES WILL RESULT FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THESE SERVICES BY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WITH GOVERNMENT EQUIPMENT. IT IS ALSO STATED THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S ACTIONS IN THIS REGARD THREATEN THE CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF PRIVATE REFUSE REMOVAL CONTRACTORS.

UPON RECEIPT OF YOUR PROTEST WE REQUESTED A FULL REPORT IN THIS MATTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY (NCHA). IN A LETTER DATED JULY 2, 1969, NCHA REPORTED THAT IT HAS BEEN OPERATING ONE TRASH PACKER DURING THE PAST YEAR AS A PILOT PROJECT TO LEARN MORE FULLY THE COSTS AND PROBLEMS INVOLVED AND TO DETERMINE WHETHER ITS OWN CREWS COULD DO A BETTER JOB OF KEEPING TRASH OFF THE STREETS AND PROPERTY GROUNDS THAN WAS BEING DONE BY THE PRESENT CONTRACTORS. IT APPEARS THAT THE TRUCKS PROCURED WERE TO BE MANUFACTURED TO GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION SPECIFICATIONS AND TO BE CAPABLE OF HANDLING NOT ONLY TWO- AND THREE-CUBIC-YARD CONTAINERS BUT THE LARGER FIVE-CUBIC-YARD TYPE AS WELL. HOWEVER, THE TWO-AND THREE CUBIC-YARD RECEPTACLES ARE PREFERRED SINCE THEY WILL BE PLACED AT CLOSER INTERVALS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF NCHA TENANTS, AND THEIR SMALLER CAPACITY WILL PERMIT EASIER AND MORE EFFICIENT HANDLING DURING THE MORE FREQUENT PICK-UPS SCHEDULED.

MOREOVER, THE REPORT OF NCHA INDICATES THAT A DETAILED EVALUATION OF COMPARATIVE COSTS WAS PERFORMED BASED UPON THE EXPERIENCES OF THE PILOT PROGRAM, AS A RESULT OF WHICH IT ESTIMATES THAT IT CAN SAVE MORE THAN THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS IN A TEN YEAR PERIOD AND AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDE BETTER AND MORE FREQUENT SERVICE TO ITS TENANTS.

IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, OUR OFFICE HAS TAKEN THE POSITION THAT THE PROPRIETY OF A DETERMINATION BY AN AGENCY AS TO WHETHER SERVICES OR PRODUCTS SHOULD BE OBTAINED UNDER CONTRACT WITH PRIVATE ENTERPRISE OR THROUGH THE USE OF GOVERNMENT-OWNED FACILITIES IS NOT A MATTER PERMITTING OF A RULING IN TERMS OF LEGAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. WE THEREFORE FIND NO LEGAL BASIS FOR OBJECTION TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TAKEN.