Skip to main content

B-123604, JUL. 11, 1955

B-123604 Jul 11, 1955
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

TO GREAT LAKES DREDGE AND DOCK COMPANY: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEFAX OF APRIL 13. YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND YOU WERE EXTENDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THIS OFFICE. AS NO REPLY HAS BEEN RECEIVED YOUR PROTEST WILL BE DISPOSED OF ON THE BASIS OF THE PRESENT RECORD. THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY IS AS FOLLOWS: "THE INVITATION FOR BIDS AND THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE HAD BEEN PREPARED ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT A DIPPER DREDGE USING TUGS AND SCOWS TO DISPOSE OF THE DREDGED MATERIAL WOULD BE USED. WAS APPROXIMATELY SIX MILES FROM THE DREDGING AREA. THE SPECIFICATIONS GAVE NOTICE THAT PART OF THE MATERIAL TO BE DREDGED WAS HARD MATERIAL THAT MIGHT REQUIRE A DIPPER DREDGE FOR REMOVAL AND THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR REMOVAL OF THIS MATERIAL WOULD NOT BE WAIVED UNLESS A DIPPER DREDGE OF ADEQUATE POWER IN THE OPINION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS USED AND FOUND TO BE UNABLE TO REMOVE THE MATERIAL.

View Decision

B-123604, JUL. 11, 1955

TO GREAT LAKES DREDGE AND DOCK COMPANY:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEFAX OF APRIL 13, 1955, PROTESTING THE PROPOSED AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR DREDGING IN THE HARBOR OF PORTLAND, MAINE, TO THE GAHAGAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO INVITATION NO. CIVENG-19-016-55-26 AND REQUESTING A HEARING IN THE MATTER.

BY OUR LETTER OF MAY 13, 1955, YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND YOU WERE EXTENDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THIS OFFICE. AS NO REPLY HAS BEEN RECEIVED YOUR PROTEST WILL BE DISPOSED OF ON THE BASIS OF THE PRESENT RECORD.

THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY IS AS FOLLOWS:

"THE INVITATION FOR BIDS AND THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE HAD BEEN PREPARED ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT A DIPPER DREDGE USING TUGS AND SCOWS TO DISPOSE OF THE DREDGED MATERIAL WOULD BE USED. FOR THIS REASON THE INVITATION INDICATED THAT THE NEAREST APPROVED DUMPING GROUND, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE REQUIREMENTS OF NAVIGATION FOR TUGS AND SCOWS, WAS APPROXIMATELY SIX MILES FROM THE DREDGING AREA. THE SPECIFICATIONS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED THAT BIDDERS COULD PROPOSE DUMPING AREAS OTHER THAN THE ONE DESCRIBED IN THE INVITATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER. THE SPECIFICATIONS GAVE NOTICE THAT PART OF THE MATERIAL TO BE DREDGED WAS HARD MATERIAL THAT MIGHT REQUIRE A DIPPER DREDGE FOR REMOVAL AND THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR REMOVAL OF THIS MATERIAL WOULD NOT BE WAIVED UNLESS A DIPPER DREDGE OF ADEQUATE POWER IN THE OPINION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS USED AND FOUND TO BE UNABLE TO REMOVE THE MATERIAL. THE POSSIBILITY THAT A HYDRAULIC DREDGE MIGHT BE USED WAS CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE BIDDERS BY ADDENDUM NO. 2.

"AFTER THE BIDS WERE OPENED AND IT WAS FOUND THAT THE LOW BIDDER HAD PROPOSED TO USE A HYDRAULIC DREDGE IN AN ALTERNATE DISPOSAL AREA OTHER THAN THAT MENTIONED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HELD A PUBLIC HEARING TO ASCERTAIN IF THERE WAS OBJECTION TO THE USE OF THE DISPOSAL AREA PROPOSED BY THE LOW BIDDER. NO OBJECTION WAS PRESENTED AT THIS HEARING AND THEREFORE THE CONTRACTING OFFICER APPROVED THE USE OF THE ALTERNATE AREA AND AWARDED CONTRACT NO. DA-19-016-ENG-3764 TO THE GAHAGAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION ON 21 APRIL 1955 AS BEING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT.'

THE PARTICULAR PROVISION IN THE ADVERTISED SPECIFICATIONS (PARAGRAPH TP-3 OF PART IV ENTITLED TECHNICAL PROVISIONS) TO WHICH REFERENCE IS MADE IN THE ABOVE REPORT PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS:

"IF, BEFORE OR AFTER THE AWARD OF THE CONTRACT, A DUMPING GROUND OTHER THAN THAT STIPULATED IN THESE SPECIFICATIONS IS PROPOSED BY THE CONTRACTOR, ITS ACCEPTANCE WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE OWNERS OF THE SUBSTITUTED GROUNDS AND FURNISH EVIDENCE THEREOF TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. ALL EXPENSES INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH PROVIDING AND MAKING AVAILABLE SUCH DUMPING GROUNDS SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTOR, AND ALL MATERIALS DEPOSITED THEREON, AND ALL OPERATIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH SHALL BE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S RISK.'

THE ACTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER IN CONSIDERING THE BID OF THEGAHAGAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION PROPOSING TO USE A HYDRAULIC DREDGE AND TO DISPOSE OF THE DREDGED MATERIAL IN AN AREA IN HUSSEY SOUND WAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ADVERTISED SPECIFICATIONS. ALL BIDDERS WERE ON NOTICE THAT THEY COULD PROPOSE DUMPING AREAS OTHER THAN AS DESCRIBED IN THE INVITATION AND THE GAHAGAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION DID NO MORE THAN ALL BIDDERS WERE PERMITTED TO DO UNDER THE INVITATION. THUS, THE RIGHTS OF OTHER BIDDERS WERE NOT PREJUDICED BY THE AWARD OF THE CONTRACT TO THAT BIDDER.

ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO PROPER LEGAL BASIS FOR OBJECTING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TAKEN IN THE MATTER.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs