B-174597(2), APR 21, 1972

B-174597(2): Apr 21, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

CANNOT AGREE THAT CORRECTION OF ALTEK'S PROPOSAL WITH REGARD TO ACCEPTANCE TESTING WOULD HAVE REQUIRED MAJOR REVISIONS SINCE. THE COMPANY COULD HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO INDICATE IN WRITING ITS INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S TESTING REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT QUALIFICATION. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT APPROPRIATE ACTION BE TAKEN TO PREVENT REPETITION OF THIS CIRCUMSTANCE IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. SECRETARY: ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY. YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THAT PORTION OF OUR DECISION WHICH EXPRESSES DISAGREEMENT WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT'S POSITION THAT CERTAIN OMISSIONS IN ALTEK'S PROPOSAL IN REGARD TO SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE "ACCEPTANCE TESTING" SECTION OF THE RFP CONSTITUTED MAJOR FACTORS IN REMOVING THE OFFER FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION.

B-174597(2), APR 21, 1972

BID PROTEST - ACCEPTANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING A DECISION DENYING THE PROTEST OF ALTEK CORPORATION AGAINST AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO CALMA COMPANY UNDER AN RFP ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR A NAUTICAL CHART GRAPHIC DIGITIZING SYSTEM. THE COMP. GEN. CANNOT AGREE THAT CORRECTION OF ALTEK'S PROPOSAL WITH REGARD TO ACCEPTANCE TESTING WOULD HAVE REQUIRED MAJOR REVISIONS SINCE, UNDER THE TERMS OF THE SOLICITATION, THE COMPANY COULD HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO INDICATE IN WRITING ITS INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S TESTING REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT QUALIFICATION. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS SUGGESTED THAT APPROPRIATE ACTION BE TAKEN TO PREVENT REPETITION OF THIS CIRCUMSTANCE IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.

TO MR. SECRETARY:

ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY, DENYING THE PROTEST OF ALTEK CORPORATION UNDER SOLICITATION NO. 2-35123, ISSUED BY THE PROCUREMENT DIVISION OF YOUR DEPARTMENT.

YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THAT PORTION OF OUR DECISION WHICH EXPRESSES DISAGREEMENT WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT'S POSITION THAT CERTAIN OMISSIONS IN ALTEK'S PROPOSAL IN REGARD TO SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE "ACCEPTANCE TESTING" SECTION OF THE RFP CONSTITUTED MAJOR FACTORS IN REMOVING THE OFFER FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION. IN THIS REGARD WE NOTE THAT PARAGRAPH 7.3, ENTITLED "ACCEPTANCE TESTING," OF THE NOS SPECIFICATION PRECISELY STATED THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUIREMENTS AND DID NOT REQUEST THAT THE OFFEROR DESCRIBE HIS ACCEPTANCE OF THESE REQUIREMENTS IN DETAIL. WE AGREE THAT ALTEK'S FAILURE TO GIVE SOME INDICATION OF ITS ASSENT TO THESE REQUIREMENTS CREATED AN AMBIGUITY AS TO THE COMPANY'S INTENTION TO COMPLY WITH THESE SPECIFICATIONS. HOWEVER, CALMA COMPANY, THE SUCCESSFUL OFFEROR, MERELY "QUOTED BACK" THE GOVERNMENT'S TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PARAGRAPH. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT CORRECTION OF ALTEK'S PROPOSAL IN THIS AREA WOULD HAVE REQUIRED MAJOR REVISIONS SINCE ALTEK COULD HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO INDICATE IN WRITING ITS INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S TESTING REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT QUALIFICATION.

IN VIEW THEREOF, WE RECOMMEND THAT APPROPRIATE ACTION BE TAKEN TO PREVENT REPETITION OF THIS CIRCUMSTANCE IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.

THE PROTEST WAS THE SUBJECT OF REPORTS DATED DECEMBER 27, 1971, AND FEBRUARY 4, 1972, FROM CHIEF, PROCUREMENT DIVISION. THE FILES FORWARDED WITH THOSE REPORTS ARE RETURNED.