Skip to main content

B-163917, NOV. 18, 1968

B-163917 Nov 18, 1968
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

KNOTT: THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 3. ORIGIN PRICES AS AN EVALUATION FACTOR IN SIMILAR FUTURE PROCUREMENTS SINCE THE INDUCEMENT TO BIDDERS FOR SUBMITTING THEIR BEST ORIGIN PRICES WAS MINIMIZED UNDER SUCH PROCEDURES. IN VIEW OF THE DIFFICULTIES OUTLINED IN THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S LETTER WE WILL INTERPOSE NO OBJECTION TO THE USE OF THE SAME PROCEDURES IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS FOR THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ITEMS INVOLVED.

View Decision

B-163917, NOV. 18, 1968

TO MR. KNOTT:

THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 3, 1968, FROM YOUR GENERAL COUNSEL OFFERING AN EXPLANATION FOR HIS NONCONCURRENCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS OFFICE STATED IN DECISION B-163917, AUGUST 7, 1968, TO PENCO PRODUCTS, INC., AND IN OUR TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO YOU OF THE SAME DATE.

OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 7 DENIED PENCO'S PROTEST BUT WE QUESTIONED THE PROPRIETY OF EXCLUDING F.O.B. ORIGIN PRICES AS AN EVALUATION FACTOR IN SIMILAR FUTURE PROCUREMENTS SINCE THE INDUCEMENT TO BIDDERS FOR SUBMITTING THEIR BEST ORIGIN PRICES WAS MINIMIZED UNDER SUCH PROCEDURES. HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF THE DIFFICULTIES OUTLINED IN THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S LETTER WE WILL INTERPOSE NO OBJECTION TO THE USE OF THE SAME PROCEDURES IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS FOR THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ITEMS INVOLVED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs