B-164109, JUN. 5, 1969

B-164109: Jun 5, 1969

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Ralph O. White
(202) 512-8278
WhiteRO@gao.gov

Kenneth E. Patton
(202) 512-8205
PattonK@gao.gov

 

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

ESQUIRE: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED APRIL 4. WE HAVE NOW RECEIVED THE AIR FORCE REPORT WHICH CONCURS IN. DETERMINATION AND THE ATTACHMENTS THERETO SHOW THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS FURNISHED BY THE REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION A LIST OF 12 SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS WHICH MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN BIDDING. THAT EIGHT OF THE 15 COMPANIES INDICATED BY TELEPHONE THAT THEY WERE SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS. THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD THE SCOPE OF THE WORK INVOLVED AND THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN BIDDING AND RECEIVING A BID PACKAGE. THAT THREE OF THE EIGHT COMPANIES CONFIRMED IN WRITING THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN BIDDING. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER DETERMINED THAT "THERE IS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION THAT BIDS OR PROPOSALS WILL BE OBTAINED FROM A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF RESPONSIBLE SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS SO THAT AWARDS WILL BE MADE AT REASONABLE PRICES.'.

B-164109, JUN. 5, 1969

TO ALEXANDER BOSKOFF, ESQUIRE:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED APRIL 4, 1969, PROTESTING ON BEHALF OF SHAYNE BROTHERS, INCORPORATED, WASHINGTON, D.C., THE POSSIBLE RENEWAL OF A CURRENT CONTRACT FOR REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES AT ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE AND THE POSSIBLE SET ASIDE FOR SMALL BUSINESS OF SUCH PROCUREMENT FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

WE HAVE NOW RECEIVED THE AIR FORCE REPORT WHICH CONCURS IN, AND INCLUDES AS ATTACHMENT, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S WRITTEN DETERMINATION DATED APRIL 29, 1969, THAT THE CONTRACT FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR PERIOD SHOULD BE AWARDED UNDER SMAL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE PROCEDURES AS SET FORTH IN ASPR 1- 706. REGRETTABLY, YOUR REQUEST FOR A COPY OF THE REPORT CANNOT BE HONORED. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MARKED "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.' BECAUSE IT CONTAINS A LIST OF PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS AND DISCLOSURE WOULD BE CONTRARY TO ASPR 2.205.5 (A). HOWEVER, IT APPEARS PERMISSIBLE TO DISCUSS THE CONTENTS OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION IN GENERAL TERMS, WITHOUT DISCLOSING THE NAMES OF THE FIRMS INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS.

THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S APRIL 29, 1969, DETERMINATION AND THE ATTACHMENTS THERETO SHOW THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS FURNISHED BY THE REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION A LIST OF 12 SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS WHICH MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN BIDDING; THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ADDED THE NAMES OF THREE COMPANIES TO THAT LIST; THAT EIGHT OF THE 15 COMPANIES INDICATED BY TELEPHONE THAT THEY WERE SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS, THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD THE SCOPE OF THE WORK INVOLVED AND THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN BIDDING AND RECEIVING A BID PACKAGE; THAT THREE OF THE EIGHT COMPANIES CONFIRMED IN WRITING THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN BIDDING; AND THAT, AS REQUIRED UNDER ASPR 1-706.5 (A) (1), WITH REFERENCE TO A TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER DETERMINED THAT "THERE IS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION THAT BIDS OR PROPOSALS WILL BE OBTAINED FROM A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF RESPONSIBLE SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS SO THAT AWARDS WILL BE MADE AT REASONABLE PRICES.'

AS STATED IN 45 COMP. GEN. 613, THERE IS NO BASIS UPON WHICH WE MAY PROPERLY OBJECT TO A DETERMINATION TO SET ASIDE A PROCUREMENT FOR SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS. ACCORDINGLY, NO FURTHER ACTION BY OUR OFFICE ON THE PROTEST HERE INVOLVED APPEARS TO BE REQUIRED AND THE CASE IS CONSIDERED CLOSED.

Oct 30, 2020

Oct 29, 2020

Oct 28, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here