B-169844, JUL. 28, 1970

B-169844: Jul 28, 1970

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

FOR VARIOUS SCREENED VEHICLE MARKINGS FOR AIR FORCE ON BASIS THAT LOW BIDDER WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE. LOW BIDDER WHO VERIFIED BID THAT IS NOT QUALIFIED AND WHO HAS BEEN DETERMINED RESPONSIBLE WAS PROPERLY AWARDED CONTRACT. ALLEGATION THAT CONTRACTOR WILL NOT FURNISH CONFORMING GOODS IS MATTER OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. TO DECALCOMANIA MANUFACTURING CORPORATION: THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO THE TELEGRAM OF MAY 19. BIDS WERE OPENED ON MAY 18. SEVEN BIDS WERE RECEIVED AND THE BID FROM GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $47. 053 WAS LOW. 672 WAS THE SIXTH LOW BID OF THE SEVEN BIDS RECEIVED. WE ARE ADVISED THAT SUBSEQUENT TO YOUR PROTEST THE AIR FORCE MADE AN AWARD TO THE LOW BIDDER. THE PROCUREMENT WAS FOR VARIOUS AIR FORCE SCREENED VEHICLE MARKINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXHIBIT "A" PAGES 1 - 3.

B-169844, JUL. 28, 1970

BID PROTEST -- BIDDER RESPONSIBILITY DECISION TO DECALCOMANIA MANUFACTURING CORPORATION DENYING PROTEST AGAINST AWARD TO GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS LOW BIDDER, FOR VARIOUS SCREENED VEHICLE MARKINGS FOR AIR FORCE ON BASIS THAT LOW BIDDER WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE. LOW BIDDER WHO VERIFIED BID THAT IS NOT QUALIFIED AND WHO HAS BEEN DETERMINED RESPONSIBLE WAS PROPERLY AWARDED CONTRACT. ALLEGATION THAT CONTRACTOR WILL NOT FURNISH CONFORMING GOODS IS MATTER OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION.

TO DECALCOMANIA MANUFACTURING CORPORATION:

THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO THE TELEGRAM OF MAY 19, 1970, AND LETTERS DATED MAY 28, 1970, WITH ENCLOSURES, AND JUNE 29, 1970, PROTESTING AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANOTHER CONCERN UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. F09650-70-B-1823, ISSUED ON MAY 1, 1970, BY THE DIRECTORATE OF PROCUREMENT AND PRODUCTION, WARNER ROBINS AIR MATERIEL AREA, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE.

BIDS WERE OPENED ON MAY 18, 1970. SEVEN BIDS WERE RECEIVED AND THE BID FROM GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,053 WAS LOW. YOUR BID IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,672 WAS THE SIXTH LOW BID OF THE SEVEN BIDS RECEIVED. WE ARE ADVISED THAT SUBSEQUENT TO YOUR PROTEST THE AIR FORCE MADE AN AWARD TO THE LOW BIDDER.

THE PROCUREMENT WAS FOR VARIOUS AIR FORCE SCREENED VEHICLE MARKINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXHIBIT "A" PAGES 1 - 3, ITEMS NOS. 1 THRU 16. PAGE 2 OF EXHIBIT "A" PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS WITH RESPECT TO THE MATERIALS TO BE USED:

"B. MATERIAL

MARKINGS WILL BE MANUFACTURED FROM PRESSURE SENSITIVE ADHESIVE-ON-THE BACK REFLECTIVE TAPE, TYPE I, CLASS 1, REFLECTIVITY 1, COLOR G (ITEMS 1 12, 14, 16); COLOR J (ITEMS 13 & 15), WHICH CONFORMS TO FEDERAL SPECIFICATION L-S-300A DATED 7 JAN 1970, ENTITLED 'SHEETING AND TAPE, REFLECTIVE: NON-EXPOSED LENS, ADHESIVE BACKING.'"

PARAGRAPH C OF EXHIBIT A PROVIDES:

"C. TRANSPARENT SCREEN PROCESS COLORS FOR REFLECTIVE MARKINGS SHALL BE NUMBER 700 SERIES COLORS AS PRODUCED BY MINNESOTA MINING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY OR EQUAL. AFTER SCREENING AND DRYING, MARKINGS WILL BE GIVEN A FINAL CLEAR SYNTHETIC GLOSSY FINISH COAT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MANUFACTURER OF THE SHEETING."

BIDDING ON:

MANUFACTURER'S NAME

BRAND OR PART NUMBER

THE LETTER TO OUR OFFICE DATED MAY 28, 1970, STATES THAT "THE SPECIFICATION IN THIS SOLICITATION CALLS FOR TYPE I, CLASS I, COLOR G WHICH MUST BE ENGINEER GRADE NUMBER 3720 SILVER SCOTCHLITE, AS MANUFACTURED BY 3M COMPANY. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE] AS NOTED IN ENCLOSURES (4) THRU (7), THERE ARE THREE GRADES, NAMELY, ENGINEER GRADE, COMMERCIAL GRADE AND PROMOTIONAL GRADE. THE USE OF EITHER COMMERCIAL GRADE OR PROMOTIONAL GRADE IS CONTRARY TO THE SPECIFICATIONS. WE FEEL THAT THE LOW BIDDERS PLAN TO SUPPLY EITHER OF THESE TWO INFERIOR GRADES. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO SUPPLY THE ENGINEER GRADE AS REQUIRED, AT THE PRICES QUOTED." THE LETTER OF MAY 28 GIVES AN ANALYSIS OF THE COSTS OF MANUFACTURING THE "SILVER SCOTCHLITE" ITEM.

A REVIEW OF GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS' BID INDICATES THAT "3M COMPANY" WAS INSERTED AS THE MANUFACTURER AND "SCOTCHLITE" AS THE BRAND OF THE ITEM WHICH THAT BIDDER PROPOSED TO FURNISH.

THE AIR FORCE HAS ADVISED THAT THE LOW BIDDER WAS REQUESTED TO VERIFY ITS BID AND THAT THIS BID WAS VERIFIED IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,053. THE LETTER FROM HEADQUARTERS, AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE STATES THAT THE BID FROM GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS IS NOT QUALIFIED IN ANY WAY AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS BIDDER CANNOT MEET THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

WE HAVE REVIEWED GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS' BID AND WE HAVE NOT FOUND ANY DEVIATIONS FROM SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS IN THIS BID. ALSO, WE HAVE NO BASIS FOR QUESTIONING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE LOW BIDDER WAS A RESPONSIBLE CONTRACTOR. THE AWARD TO GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS THEREFORE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN PROPER.

THE QUESTION WHETHER GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS WILL TENDER NONCONFORMING GOODS IS A MATTER RELATED TO CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND WE ASSUME THAT THE GOVERNMENT INSPECTORS HAVE THE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE GOODS TENDERED BY GENERAL MARKING SYSTEMS MEET SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. IF YOU HAVE SOME SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS OR WILL ACCEPT NONCONFORMING GOODS WE WILL BE PLEASED TO GIVE CONSIDERATION TO ANY SUCH EVIDENCE. OTHERWISE WE WILL CONSIDER THE MATTER CLOSED.