B-146094, AUG. 24, 1961

B-146094, AUG. 24, 1961

TO KECO INDUSTRIES, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 12, 1961, AND YOUR TELEGRAM OF JUNE 9, 1961, PROTESTING AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO THE THERM-AIR MANUFACTURING COMPANY UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. IFB 151-301-61. YOU STATE THE BASIS FOR YOUR PROTEST IS YOUR BELIEF THAT PROMISE OF THIRTY DAY DELIVERY IS IRRESPONSIBLE AND THIS COULD HAVE BEEN ASCERTAINED BY A COMPETENT, OBJECTIVE PRE-AWARD SURVEY.

THE INVITATION, ISSUED ON APRIL 11, 1961, BY THE PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD, REQUESTED BIDS FOR MOBILE, TRAILER MOUNTED AIR CONDITIONER UNITS, SETS OF SPARE PARTS AND TECHNICAL MANUALS. THE DESIRED DELIVERY WAS STATED AS A MINIMUM OF TWENTY-ONE AND A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS AFTER AWARD FOR DELIVERY OF THE FIRST UNIT WITH DELIVERY OF THE BALANCE AT THE RATE OF TWO PER WEEK AFTER DELIVERY OF THE FIRST UNIT. BIDDERS WERE PERMITTED TO STATE THEIR PROPOSED DELIVERY SCHEDULES BUT THE INVITATION PROVIDED THAT "ANY BID OFFERING DELIVERY BEYOND THE MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE TIME SET FORTH BELOW SHALL BE CONSIDERED NON RESPONSIVE TO THE INVITATION AND WILL BE REJECTED.' THE MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE TIME SET FORTH WAS THIRTY DAYS. IT WAS FURTHER PROVIDED THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S DESIRED DELIVERY SCHEDULE WOULD APPLY UNLESS THE BIDDER OFFERED A DIFFERENT SCHEDULE.

SIX BIDS WERE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE INVITATION. THE ABSTRACT OF BIDS FURNISHED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICE DISCLOSES THAT YOUR FIRM OFFERED DELIVERY AS REQUIRED AND THE FIVE OTHER BIDDERS STATED THIRTY DAYS AS THE TIME OFFERED FOR DELIVERY OF THE FIRST UNIT.

THE TERM-AIR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PEEKSKILL, NEW YORK, WAS LOW BIDDER FOR THE PROCUREMENT. AN EXTENSIVE PRE-AWARD SURVEY OF THERM-AIR WAS CONDUCTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL, NEW YORK, AND A REPORT OF THE SURVEY WAS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMANDER OF THE PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD ON MAY 24, 1961. THE REPORT DISCLOSED THAT THE NORMAL FUNCTION OF THERM-AIR IS MANUFACTURING REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATION MACHINERY AND AIR CONDITIONING UNITS REQUIRED MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUES AND MATERIALS SIMILAR TO THOSE REQUIRED BY THE INVITATION IN THIS CASE. THE REPORT STATED THAT THERM-AIR HAD IN STOCK A SUFFICIENT QUANTITY OF RAW MATERIAL AND COMPONENT PARTS TO PRODUCE THREE COMPLETE UNITS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TRAILERS FOR MOUNTING THE UNITS AND HAD FIRM COMMITMENTS FOR DELIVERY OF THE TRAILERS AND ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS TO ENABLE IT TO MEET THE STATED DELIVERY SCHEDULE.

THE INSPECTOR REPORTED, WITH RESPECT TO PAST PERFORMANCE, THAT HIS OFFICE HAD PROCESSED THIRTEEN CONTRACTS COMPLETED BY THERM-AIR WITH A TOTAL DOLLAR VALUE OF $730,952. OF THIS AMOUNT, 89.7 PERCENT WERE SHIPPED AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. THE NEW YORK ORDNANCE DISTRICT ADVISED THE INSPECTOR THAT THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH THERM-AIR WAS SATISFACTORY WITH REGARD TO BOTH QUALITY OF WORK AND DELIVERY.

AFTER AN EXHAUSTIVE DISCUSSION OF THE FACTORS INVOLVED, THE SURVEY REPORT CONCLUDED THAT THERM-AIR HAD AVAILABLE AND ADEQUATE FACILITIES, EXPERIENCED PERSONNEL WITH ADEQUATE TECHNICAL BACKGROUND IN THIS FIELD, OPEN CAPACITY, ADEQUATE FINANCES, FIRM COMMITMENTS, AND ACCEPTABLE INSPECTION AND QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES, ALL OF WHICH ADDED UP TO THE ABILITY TO MEET THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE INVITATION.

YOU HAVE ALLEGED THAT OFFER OF THIRTY DAY DELIVERY IN THIS PROCUREMENT IS IRRESPONSIBLE, BUT THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ALL SIX BIDDERS, INCLUDING YOUR FIRM, OFFERED TO MAKE INITIAL DELIVERY OF THE FIRST UNIT THIRTY DAYS AFTER AWARD. THE PRE-AWARD SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL, NEW YORK, HAS IMPRESSED US AS BEING BOTH COMPETENT AND OBJECTIVE. IN OUR OPINION, THE PRE-AWARD SURVEY SHOWED THERM-AIR TO BE A RESPONSIBLE BIDDER WHO OFFERED A REALISTIC DELIVERY SCHEDULE.

ON THE RECORD BEFORE US, WE MUST CONCLUDE THAT THE ALLEGATIONS IN YOUR PROTEST ARE WITHOUT FOUNDATION AND OFFER NO BASIS UPON WHICH WE MAY OBJECT TO AWARD OF THE CONTRACT TO THERM-AIR AS THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. ACCORDINGLY, YOUR PROTEST IN THIS MATTER IS DENIED.