B-170504(1), MAY 26, 1971

B-170504(1): May 26, 1971

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

WHILE IT IS THE COMP. 1971) THERE IS NO SHOWING THAT ANY OFFEROR WAS PREJUDICED THEREBY OR THAT THE PROCUREMENT WAS OTHERWISE IMPROPER. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR GAO TO OBJECT TO THE AWARDS. INCORPORATED: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE COPY OF YOUR UNDATED LETTER TO THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY RECEIVED BY OUR OFFICE CONCERNING REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. POINTING OUT THAT A YEAR HAS ELAPSED SINCE THE RFP WAS ISSUED. YOUR FIRM WAS NOT CONTACTED FOR DISCUSSIONS OR NEGOTIATIONS. TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER PERTAINING TO YOUR MOVE TO NEW FACILITIES AND ADJUSTED OVERHEAD RATES WAS IGNORED. IT IS REPORTED THAT THE RFP WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 3. 39 PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED ON APRIL 22. FOURTEEN PROPOSALS WERE FOUND TECHNICALLY UNACCEPTABLE BUT SUSCEPTIBLE OF BEING MADE ACCEPTABLE.

B-170504(1), MAY 26, 1971

BID PROTEST - AWARDS PENDING - LENGTH OF TIME DECISION CONCERNING PROTEST RELATING TO THE LENGTH OF TIME A PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES IN THE FIELDS OF WRITING, GRAPHIC ARTS, AND EDITING HAS BEEN PENDING, UNDER AN RFP ISSUED BY THE NAVY PURCHASING OFFICE. WHILE IT IS THE COMP. GEN.'S OPINION THAT THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT TOOK AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME (RFP ISSUED MAR. 3, 1970; AWARD APPROVED DEC. 18, 1970; AWARDS MADE MAR. 12, 1971) THERE IS NO SHOWING THAT ANY OFFEROR WAS PREJUDICED THEREBY OR THAT THE PROCUREMENT WAS OTHERWISE IMPROPER. THUS, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR GAO TO OBJECT TO THE AWARDS.

TO GRAPHICS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE COPY OF YOUR UNDATED LETTER TO THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY RECEIVED BY OUR OFFICE CONCERNING REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. N00600-70-R-5296, ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES NAVY PURCHASING OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D.C., FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES IN THE FIELDS OF WRITING, GRAPHIC ARTS AND EDITING.

YOUR FIRST OBJECTION RELATES TO THE LENGTH OF TIME THIS PROCUREMENT HAS BEEN PENDING, POINTING OUT THAT A YEAR HAS ELAPSED SINCE THE RFP WAS ISSUED. SECOND, YOU STATE THAT ALTHOUGH YOU SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL, YOUR FIRM WAS NOT CONTACTED FOR DISCUSSIONS OR NEGOTIATIONS. IN THIS REGARD, YOU ASSERT THAT YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 1971, TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER PERTAINING TO YOUR MOVE TO NEW FACILITIES AND ADJUSTED OVERHEAD RATES WAS IGNORED. NEXT, YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO HAS BEEN PERFORMING THE SERVICES CALLED FOR UNDER THE RFP DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE PROCUREMENT. FINALLY, YOU ASKED TO BE ADVISED OF THE RESULTS OF AN INVESTIGATION OF THE PREVIOUS CONTRACTOR AND THE HOURS AND PRICES CHARGED UNDER THAT CONTRACT.

IT IS REPORTED THAT THE RFP WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 3, 1970, AND 39 PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED ON APRIL 22, 1970, AND FORWARDED TO THE NAVY PRINTING AND PUBLICATIONS SERVICE (NPPS) FOR REVIEW, EVALUATION AND DETERMINATION OF TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY. FOURTEEN PROPOSALS WERE FOUND TECHNICALLY UNACCEPTABLE BUT SUSCEPTIBLE OF BEING MADE ACCEPTABLE. THEREFORE, TECHNICAL DISCUSSIONS WERE UNDERTAKEN WITH THOSE FOURTEEN FIRMS. FURTHER, IT IS REPORTED THAT DISCUSSIONS WERE HELD WITH ALL OFFERORS PRIOR TO THE CUT-OFF DATE OF OCTOBER 9, 1970, AND THAT SUCH DISCUSSIONS WERE HELD WITH YOU AT YOUR PLANT ON AUGUST 28, 1970. AFTER THE CUT-OFF DATE THE PROPOSALS WERE SUBMITTED TO NPPS FOR FINAL EVALUATION. THE CONTRACT CLEARANCE BRANCH APPROVED AWARDS ON DECEMBER 18, 1970. ALL OFFERORS WERE INFORMED OF THE PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTORS ON JANUARY 5, 1971. PROTESTS TO THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION CONCERNING THE SMALL BUSINESS STATUS OF ONE FIRM WAS NOT RESOLVED UNTIL MARCH. ON MARCH 12, 1971, AWARDS WERE MADE.

WITH REGARD TO YOUR OFFER OF JANUARY 22, 1971, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER REPORTS THAT ON FEBRUARY 9, 1971, HE ADVISED YOU THAT SINCE NEGOTIATIONS WERE CLOSED HE COULD NOT CONSIDER YOUR PROPOSED REVISION. FURTHER, HE REPORTS THAT REDUCTION OF YOUR PRICE TO $141,250 WOULD NOT HAVE PUT YOU IN LINE FOR AWARD AS THE CONTRACTS AWARDED RANGED FROM $117,128 TO $128,900. IT IS REPORTED THAT INTERIM SERVICES WERE PROVIDED BY POTOMAC RESEARCH, INCORPORATED, AND OFFSET COMPOSITE SERVICES, INCORPORATED, AFTER THE SIX LOWEST OFFERORS UNDER THE SUBJECT RFP WERE ORALLY SOLICITED. OFFSET COMPOSITE'S CONTRACT RAN FROM OCTOBER 1, 1970, TO DECEMBER 10, 1971, AND POTOMAC'S RAN FROM OCTOBER 1, 1970, UNTIL MARCH 12, 1971.

IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THIS PROCUREMENT TOOK AN INORDINATE PERIOD OF TIME. SINCE THE RECORD BEFORE US FAILS TO INDICATE ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROTRACTED TIME, WE ARE CALLING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO SHOWING THAT ANY OFFERORS WERE PREJUDICED THEREBY, OR THAT THE PROCUREMENT WAS OTHERWISE IMPROPER. ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR OUR OFFICE TO OBJECT TO THE AWARDS.

WITH REGARD TO YOUR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AS TO AN INVESTIGATION OF THE PREVIOUS CONTRACT FOR THESE SERVICES, OUR OFFICE IS PRESENTLY MAKING A STUDY OF PREVIOUS PROCUREMENTS. WHEN WE HAVE COMPLETED OUR REVIEW, A REPORT WILL BE MADE TO APPROPRIATE OFFICIALS OF THE GOVERNMENT.