B-149323, SEP. 11, 1963

B-149323, SEP. 11, 1963

TO C AND M INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATES, INC.:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 26, 1963, REFERRING TO OUR LETTER OF MARCH 13, 1963, DENYING YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE USE OF ALLEGED RESTRICTIVE SPECIFICATIONS BY THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 2219, AND BY THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. FHVM-4 42664-A-6-20-62.

YOUR LETTER IS, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS:

"SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I HAD OCCASION TO WRITE YOU AND TO RECOGNIZE IN THIS LETTER THE TECHNICAL INFORMATION SUPPLIED YOU MUST COME FROM THE AGENCY. I SHOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS, FIRST, THE MATTER OF THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT. QUOTING THE LETTER FROM THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT DATED NOVEMBER 9, 1962, THEY ADVISE AS FOLLOWS:

"ON SOME PALLET TRUCKS, THE BATTERY COMPARTMENT RESTS ON THE LIFTING FORKS OR SKID ADAPTER SO THAT POWER FROM THE BATTERY IS CONSUMED IN LIFTING THE BATTERY ITSELF IN ADDITION TO THE PAY LOAD. IT IS OUR OPINION THIS ARRANGEMENT IS UNDESIRABLE IN THIS TYPE OF EQUIPMENT IN THAT IT RESULTS IN AN UNNECESSARY ADDITIONAL USE OF POWER.

"WE MAINTAIN THAT THE METHOD OF SUPPORTING THE BATTERY HAS A VITAL EFFECT UPON EFFICIENCY OF THE EQUIPMENT FOR THE REASON GIVEN IN OUR FIRST COMMENT. CLARK EQUIPMENT COMPANY, BATTLE CREEK, MICHIGAN; YALE AND TOWNE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA; LEWIS SHEPARD PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED, WATERTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, AND THE RAYMOND CORPORATION, GREENE, NEW YORK, MANUFACTURE PALLET TRUCKS WITH THE BATTERY COMPARTMENT A FIXED INTEGRAL PART OF THE FRAME, RATHER THAN RIDING ON THE LOAD-LIFTING FORKS. ACCORDINGLY, WE BELIEVE MR. MINICH'S ALLEGATION THAT THE SPECIFICATION IS RESTRICTIVE IS UNFOUNDED.'

"I SHOULD LIKE TO REPLY BY FIRST SAYING THAT I BELIEVE IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT PEOPLE GIVE YOU CORRECT INFORMATION. THE WRITER DOES NOT HAVE TIME TO RESEARCH EVERY COMPETITOR'S TRUCK TO DETERMINE THE DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION. HOWEVER, I SHOULD LIKE TO OFFER IN EVIDENCE BULLETIN NUMBER 5073C OF YALE AND TOWNE MANUFACTURING COMPANY WHICH CLEARLY ILLUSTRATES THE BATTERY RESTING ON THE FORKS AND BEING RAISED EACH AND EVERY TIME A PALLET LOAD OF MATERIAL IS MOVED. I SHOULD ALSO LIKE TO MAKE THE STATEMENT THAT ONE ADDITIONAL VERY LARGE MANUFACTURER OF PALLET TRUCKS ALSO HAS THE TRUCK DESIGNED IN THE SAME MANNER. THIS REFUTES THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT'S STATEMENT IN WHICH THEY MAINTAIN THAT THE METHOD OF SUPPORTING THE BATTERY HAS A VITAL EFFECT UPON THE EFFICIENCY OF EQUIPMENT. * * *"

THE FACT THAT YALE AND TOWNE MANUFACTURING COMPANY MAY MANUFACTURE PALLET TRUCKS WITH THE BATTERY COMPARTMENT RIDING ON THE LOAD-LIFTING FORKS DOES NOT NECESSARILY ESTABLISH THAT THE QUOTED INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT IS INCORRECT, SINCE THE SAME MANUFACTURER MAY MAKE SEVERAL TYPES OF TRUCKS. THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT'S STATEMENT WAS DIRECTED TO SHOWING THAT THERE WERE SEVERAL MANUFACTURERS WHO DID MANUFACTURE PALLET TRUCKS WITH THE BATTERY COMPARTMENT A FIXED INTEGRAL PART OF THE FRAME, AND THAT THERE WAS COMPETITION FOR FURNISHING THAT TYPE OF TRUCK.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 14, 1962, TO THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT IT WAS STATED THAT YOU HAD SUBMITTED TO YOUR PRINCIPAL, MOTO-TRUC COMPANY, COPIES OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR REVIEW AND UPON RECEIVING THEIR COMMENTS THEREON, YOU WOULD FURNISH THEM TO THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT FOR CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE REVISION OF THE SPECIFICATION. WE SUGGEST THAT SUCH ACTION BE TAKEN AS UNDOUBTEDLY MOTO- TRUC COMPANY IS AWARE OF THE DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION OF COMPETITIVE EQUIPMENT AND THE ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF EQUIPMENT FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSES. ALSO IN LETTER DATED JUNE 5, 1962, THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT REQUESTED THAT YOU ADVISE WHEREIN THE SPECIFICATION WAS IMPROPER, AND STATED THAT UPON RECEIPT OF SUCH INFORMATION THEY WOULD REVIEW THE SPECIFICATION. IN THIS CONNECTION IT CONSISTENTLY HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR DRAFTING PROPER SPECIFICATIONS WHICH REFLECT THE ACTUAL NEEDS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND FOR DETERMINING FACTUALLY WHETHER THE ARTICLES OFFERED BY BIDDERS MET THESE SPECIFICATIONS IS PRIMARILY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY. SEE 17 COMP. GEN. 554; 30 ID 368.

WE ARE ADVISED THAT BOTH THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT AND GSA PREPARE SPECIFICATIONS FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL PROCUREMENT OF LIFT TRUCKS ON THE BASIS OF THE SPECIALIZED REQUIREMENTS OF THE INTENDED USE. ON THE RECORD BEFORE US WE ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT IN A POSITION TO TAKE ANY ACTION IN ANY SPECIFIC CASE, AND WE CANNOT UNDERTAKE TO DIRECT THE PROCURING AGENCIES HOW TO DRAW FUTURE SPECIFICATIONS ON A GENERAL BASIS. SO FAR AS CONCERNS YOUR SPECIFIC COMPLAINT AGAINST THE POST OFFICE REQUIREMENT FOR BATTERIES TO BE MOUNTED ON THE TRUCK FRAME RATHER THAN ON THE LIFTED PORTION, WE NOTE FROM THE MATERIAL FURNISHED BY YOU THAT THE BATTERIES MAY WEIGH FROM 300 TO 800 POUNDS. THIS WEIGHT OBVIOUSLY IS TOO LARGE IN PROPORTION TO THE TOTAL LOAD CAPACITY OF TRUCKS IN THE TWO OR THREE TON RANGE TO BE CONSIDERED NEGLIGIBLE OR IMMATERIAL, AND WE THEREFORE CANNOT SAY THAT THE DEPARTMENT POSITION IS WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION.