B-169094(1), AUG 13, 1971

B-169094(1): Aug 13, 1971

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

ALTHOUGH THE PROTESTS WERE DENIED. GIBSON: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE PROTESTS ON BEHALF OF UNION MINERALS & ALLOYS CORPORATION AND THE INSTITUTE OF SCRAP IRON & STEEL AGAINST SALES BY THE MARITIME ADMINISTRATION OF SURPLUS GOVERNMENT VESSELS FROM THE NATIONAL DEFENSE RESERVE FLEET TO FOREIGNERS FOR SCRAPPING ABROAD. WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF REPORTS DATED MARCH 24 AND JUNE 11. ENCLOSED ARE COPIES OF OUR DECISIONS OF TODAY TO THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE PROTESTANTS. WE FEEL THAT A REASONABLE ALLOWANCE FOR THE COST OF REMOVAL OF BALLAST IS A RELEVANT FACTOR. YOUR OFFICIALS HAVE INDICATED THAT ONLY THE COST OF THE 11 MEN ACTUALLY USED IN DISMANTLING MAY BE CONSIDERED.

B-169094(1), AUG 13, 1971

BID PROTEST - SALE OF SURPLUS GOVERNMENT-OWNED VESSELS TRANSMITTING COPIES OF DECISIONS DENYING THE PROTESTS OF UNION MINERALS AND ALLOYS CORPORATION AND THE INSTITUTE OF SCRAP IRON & STEEL AGAINST THE POLICIES OF THE MARITIME ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE SALE OF SURPLUS VESSELS FROM THE NATIONAL DEFENSE RESERVE FLEET. ALTHOUGH THE PROTESTS WERE DENIED, THE COMP. GEN. FEELS THAT THE FLOOR PRICE FOR SALES TO CITIZENS SHOULD BE DETERMINED ON A CURRENT BASIS AND SHOULD INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF ALL RELEVANT FACTORS, INCLUDING THOSE LISTED IN SECTION 5, MERCHANT MARINE ACT OF 1920.

TO MR. GIBSON:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE PROTESTS ON BEHALF OF UNION MINERALS & ALLOYS CORPORATION AND THE INSTITUTE OF SCRAP IRON & STEEL AGAINST SALES BY THE MARITIME ADMINISTRATION OF SURPLUS GOVERNMENT VESSELS FROM THE NATIONAL DEFENSE RESERVE FLEET TO FOREIGNERS FOR SCRAPPING ABROAD, WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF REPORTS DATED MARCH 24 AND JUNE 11, 1971, FROM THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR MARITIME AFFAIRS.

ENCLOSED ARE COPIES OF OUR DECISIONS OF TODAY TO THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE PROTESTANTS. AS STATED IN OUR DECISION OF TODAY, WE BELIEVE THE FLOOR PRICE FOR SALES TO CITIZENS SHOULD BE DETERMINED ON A CURRENT BASIS AND INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF ALL RELEVANT FACTORS, INCLUDING THOSE SPECIFIED IN SECTION 5. WE FEEL THAT A REASONABLE ALLOWANCE FOR THE COST OF REMOVAL OF BALLAST IS A RELEVANT FACTOR. IN THIS REGARD, WE NOTE THE CONTENTION THAT THE COST OF THIS OPERATION SHOULD INCLUDE LABOR AND OVERHEAD FOR THE ENTIRE COST OF RUNNING THE SHIPYARD AND NOT ONLY THE 11 MEN WHO WORK AT DISMANTLING THE SHIP. ON THE OTHER HAND, YOUR OFFICIALS HAVE INDICATED THAT ONLY THE COST OF THE 11 MEN ACTUALLY USED IN DISMANTLING MAY BE CONSIDERED. IN REVIEWING THE FLOOR PRICE IN LIGHT OF CURRENT CONDITIONS, WE SUGGEST THAT THE REVIEW INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF A PROPER ALLOWANCE FOR REMOVAL OF BALLAST.