B-194967, OCT 25, 1979

B-194967: Oct 25, 1979

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

DIGEST: PROTEST OF ALLEGED SOLICITATION IMPROPRIETIES NOT FILED PRIOR TO CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION ON MERITS. CAD ESSENTIALLY ALLEGES THAT THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE CONTAINED IN AMENDMENT NUMBER 0001 WAS UNNECESSARILY SHORT AND WAS DESIGNED TO FAVOR A COMPETING OFFEROR. AMENDMENT NUMBER 0001 TO THE RFP WAS ISSUED ON MAY 1 AND ESTABLISHED AN ACCELERATED DELIVERY DATE. CAD'S PROPOSAL DID NOT CONFORM TO THE REQUIRED DELIVERY SCHEDULE AND CAD NOW CONTENDS THAT THE ACCELERATED DELIVERY WAS NOT A VALID REQUIREMENT AND THAT NONCONFORMING PROPOSALS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REJECTED. WHICH ARE APPARENT PRIOR TO CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS. IS UNTIMELY AND WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED ON THE MERITS.

B-194967, OCT 25, 1979

DIGEST: PROTEST OF ALLEGED SOLICITATION IMPROPRIETIES NOT FILED PRIOR TO CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION ON MERITS.

CALIFORNIA AERO DYNAMICS CORPORATION:

CALIFORNIA AERO DYNAMICS CORPORATION (CAD) PROTESTS AGAINST ANY AWARD UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. F34601-79-R-1076 AND AMENDMENT NUMBER 0001 ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, OKLAHOMA CITY AIR LOGISTICS CENTER, TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA.

CAD ESSENTIALLY ALLEGES THAT THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE CONTAINED IN AMENDMENT NUMBER 0001 WAS UNNECESSARILY SHORT AND WAS DESIGNED TO FAVOR A COMPETING OFFEROR. THE AIR FORCE REPORTS THAT DUE TO AN INCREASED URGENCY FOR THE ITEMS, AMENDMENT NUMBER 0001 TO THE RFP WAS ISSUED ON MAY 1 AND ESTABLISHED AN ACCELERATED DELIVERY DATE, EXTENDED THE CLOSING DATE TO MAY 8 AND EXPRESSLY STATED THAT BECAUSE OF THE URGENCY OF THE REQUIREMENT NONCONFORMING PROPOSALS WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED. CAD'S PROPOSAL DID NOT CONFORM TO THE REQUIRED DELIVERY SCHEDULE AND CAD NOW CONTENDS THAT THE ACCELERATED DELIVERY WAS NOT A VALID REQUIREMENT AND THAT NONCONFORMING PROPOSALS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REJECTED.

PROTESTS ALLEGING SOLICITATION IMPROPRIETIES, WHICH ARE APPARENT PRIOR TO CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS, AS HERE, MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 20.2(B)(1) OF OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES. 4 C.F.R. PART 20 (1979). SEE CALIFORNIA COMPUTER PRODUCTS, INC., B-193611, MARCH 16, 1979, 79-1 CPD 150. ACCORDINGLY, CAD'S PROTEST FILED HERE ON MAY 25, 1979, IS UNTIMELY AND WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED ON THE MERITS.

LASTLY, WE NOTE THAT CAD FEARS THAT AWARD WOULD BE MADE TO A FOREIGN CONTRACTOR AT A HIGHER PRICE IN VIOLATION OF THE BUY AMERICAN CLAUSE OF THE SOLICITATION. SINCE CAD IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR AWARD THERE IS NO NEED TO CONSIDER THIS ASPECT OF CAD'S PROTEST.

Oct 20, 2020

Oct 16, 2020

Oct 15, 2020

Oct 14, 2020

Oct 9, 2020

Oct 8, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here