B-175015(2), SEP 29, 1972

B-175015(2): Sep 29, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

ALTHOUGH THE PROTEST IS DENIED. THE IFB WAS AMBIGUOUS IN THAT IT DID NOT SPECIFY WHETHER THE FIRST ARTICLE WOULD SERVE AS A MANUFACTURING STANDARD AS REQUIRED BY ASPR 1-1903(C)(I). SECRETARY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO LETTER AMCGC-P DATED JUNE 29. ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE DENIED THE PROTEST. WE HAVE NOTED A DEFICIENCY WHICH SHOULD BE AVOIDED IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION COULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE BID PRICE. WHILE WE ARE DENYING THE PROTEST IN THIS CASE.

B-175015(2), SEP 29, 1972

BID PROTEST - FIRST ARTICLE - AMBIGUITIES CONCERNING THE PROTEST OF GULTON BATTERY CORPORATION AGAINST AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO FOURDEE, INC., UNDER AN IFB ISSUED BY THE ARMY MISSILE COMMAND, REDSTONE ARSENAL, ALA. ALTHOUGH THE PROTEST IS DENIED, THE IFB WAS AMBIGUOUS IN THAT IT DID NOT SPECIFY WHETHER THE FIRST ARTICLE WOULD SERVE AS A MANUFACTURING STANDARD AS REQUIRED BY ASPR 1-1903(C)(I).

TO DEAR MR. SECRETARY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO LETTER AMCGC-P DATED JUNE 29, 1972, AND PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE, CONCERNING THE PROTEST OF GULTON BATTERY CORPORATION AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANOTHER BIDDER UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. DAAH01-72-B-0041, ISSUED AUGUST 23, 1972, BY THE ARMY MISSILE COMMAND, REDSTONE ARSENAL, ALABAMA.

ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE DENIED THE PROTEST, WE HAVE NOTED A DEFICIENCY WHICH SHOULD BE AVOIDED IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. ARMED SERVICES PROCUREMENT REGULATION (ASPR) 1 1903(C)(I) PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:

"(C) THE SOLICITATION SHALL ALSO:

(I)STATE WHETHER AN APPROVED FIRST ARTICLE SHALL SERVE AS A MANUFACTURING STANDARD;"

COMMUNICATION WITH THE PROTESTOR INDICATES CONFUSION OVER WHETHER THE BASIC DELIVERIES UNDER ANY CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THE SOLICITATION WOULD BE HELD TO THE MANUFACTURING STANDARD ESTABLISHED BY THE APPROVED FIRST ARTICLE. WE AGREE THAT THE ABSENCE OF ANY STATEMENT IN THIS REGARD PRESENTS AN AMBIGUITY. FURTHER, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION COULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE BID PRICE.

WHILE WE ARE DENYING THE PROTEST IN THIS CASE, WE RECOMMEND THAT APPROPRIATE STEPS BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT FUTURE SOLICITATIONS WHICH CONTAIN FIRST ARTICLE REQUIREMENTS CONTAIN A STATEMENT COMPLYING WITH ASPR 1-1903(C)(I) CITED ABOVE.