B-160576, NOV. 8, 1967

B-160576: Nov 8, 1967

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

ALTHOUGH PROTESTING BIDDER MAY HAVE BEEN DENIED AWARD FOR MULTI-YEAR PROCUREMENT ON BASIS OF DOUBTFUL DETERMINATION OF LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY PRESENT RECORD DOES NOT SUPPORT OR REQUIRE CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD BE IN INTEREST OF GOVERNMENT TO TERMINATE REMAINDER CONTRACT AND FACT THAT PROTESTANT WOULD BID LESS THAN PRESENT CONTRACT PRICE IF GIVEN OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT JUSTIFY TERMINATION ACTION. INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 14. THE SERVICES IN QUESTION ARE NOW COVERED BY CONTRACT NO. WHICH WAS AWARDED TO INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS. THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION THAT YOU WERE NOT RESPONSIBLE WAS ERRONEOUS. SETTING FORTH THE EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HAD DETERMINED THAT YOU WERE NOT RESPONSIBLE.

B-160576, NOV. 8, 1967

CONTRACTS - MULTI-YEAR PROCUREMENTS - READVERTISEMENT DECISION TO METROPOLITAN SECURITY SERVICES, INC. CONCERNING READVERTISEMENT OF THIRD YEAR OF 3 YEAR MULTI-YEAR PROCUREMENT FOR GUARD SERVICES AT LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE STATION. PRIOR DECISION 46 C.G. (B- 160576, 6/13/67). ALTHOUGH PROTESTING BIDDER MAY HAVE BEEN DENIED AWARD FOR MULTI-YEAR PROCUREMENT ON BASIS OF DOUBTFUL DETERMINATION OF LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY PRESENT RECORD DOES NOT SUPPORT OR REQUIRE CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD BE IN INTEREST OF GOVERNMENT TO TERMINATE REMAINDER CONTRACT AND FACT THAT PROTESTANT WOULD BID LESS THAN PRESENT CONTRACT PRICE IF GIVEN OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT JUSTIFY TERMINATION ACTION.

TO METROPOLITAN SECURITY SERVICES, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 14, 1967, PROTESTING AGAINST THE REFUSAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS TO PERFORM SECURITY GUARD AND RELATED SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1969 AT LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE STATION, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA. THE SERVICES IN QUESTION ARE NOW COVERED BY CONTRACT NO. AFO4/693/-387, WHICH WAS AWARDED TO INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC., ON JUNE 30, 1966, FOR THE THREE-YEAR PERIOD JULY 1, 1966, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1969, UNDER THE MULTI-YEAR PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN ARMED SERVICES PROCUREMENT REGULATION (ASPR) 1-322.

IN DECEMBER 1966, YOU FILED A PROTEST WITH OUR OFFICE AGAINST THE AWARD OF THE CONTRACT IN QUESTION STATING THAT YOU HAD SUBMITTED THE APPARENT LOW RESPONSIVE BID UNDER THE INVITATION FOR BIDS; THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION THAT YOU WERE NOT RESPONSIBLE WAS ERRONEOUS; AND THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HAD FAILED TO REQUEST A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (SBA) AND HAD NOT NOTIFIED SBA OF AWARD TO OTHER THAN THE LOW BIDDER. ACCORDINGLY, YOU REQUESTED THAT OUR OFFICE DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE TO REOPEN THE CONTRACT FOR BIDDING ON THE REMAINING TERM.

IN OUR DECISION B-160576, JUNE 13, 1967, 46 COMP. GEN. -------- , WE REVIEWED THE RECORD OF THE PROCUREMENT, SETTING FORTH THE EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HAD DETERMINED THAT YOU WERE NOT RESPONSIBLE, AND WE INFORMED YOU THAT THE AWARD, WHICH WAS MADE AFTER SUCH DETERMINATION, HAD ALSO BEEN PRECEDED BY A CONTRACTING OFFICER'S CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ASPR 1-705.4 (C) (IV) THAT URGENCY PRECLUDED REFERRAL OF THE MATTER TO SBA AND THAT SUCH DECISION HAD BEEN CLEARED WITH THE PROCURING ACTIVITY'S SMALL BUSINESS SPECIALIST AND WITH THE SBA LOS ANGELES OFFICE. THE CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH OF OUR DECISION READS AS FOLLOWS:

"FROM THE FOREGOING, IT APPEARS THAT YOU WERE DETERMINED TO BE NONRESPONSIBLE PRIMARILY FOR FAILING TO HAVE HIRED OR ARRANGED TO HIRE CLEARED PERSONNEL BY THE CONTRACT DATE. WHETHER OR NOT THIS WAS A SUBSTANTIAL BASIS FOR THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S DETERMINATION THAT YOU WERE NOT A RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THIS PROCUREMENT--A MATTER AS TO WHICH WE HAVE SOME DOUBT--WE BELIEVE THE TIME WHICH HAS ELAPSED SINCE THE CONTRACT DATE OF JULY 1, 1966, THE FACT THAT YOU DID NOT SUBMIT A PROTEST TO THIS OFFICE FOR SEVERAL MONTHS THEREAFTER AND THE FACT THAT YOUR OWN CARELESSNESS IN PREPARING AND CLARIFYING YOUR BID MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE PROBLEMS WHICH ENSUED, ALL MILITATE AGAINST THE WISDOM AND PROPRIETY OF OUR DIRECTING THE CANCELLATION OF THE CONTRACT. WE ARE, HOWEVER, RECOMMENDING TO THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE THAT IN ANY FUTURE PROCUREMENTS OF SUCH SERVICES THE OBLIGATIONS OF PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTORS WITH RESPECT TO SECURITY CLEARANCES AND EMPLOYMENT ARRANGEMENTS BE CLARIFIED.'

IN YOUR CURRENT PROTEST, YOU ASSERT THAT YOU CAN PERFORM ACCORDING TO SPECIFICATION AT A CONSIDERABLE SAVINGS TO THE GOVERNMENT AND AT A FIGURE SUBSTANTIALLY BELOW THE PRICE AT WHICH AWARD WAS MADE. ACCORDINGLY, AND ON THE BASIS THAT YOU WERE DENIED THE ORIGINAL AWARD DUE TO AN ERRONEOUS DECISION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, YOU REQUEST THE INTERCESSION OF OUR OFFICE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE TO READVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SERVICES INVOLVED FOR THE THIRD YEAR (FISCAL YEAR 1969) COVERED BY THE CONTRACT, AND THUS AFFORD YOU ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE FOR SUCH SERVICES.

BY LETTER DATED OCTOBER 9, 1967, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HAS FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE A COPY OF A LETTER DATED AUGUST 9, 1967, ADDRESSED TO YOU BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, IN WHICH IT IS STATED THAT THE PROCURING ACTIVITY IS NOT IN A POSITION TO READVERTISE THE PROCUREMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1969 BECAUSE IT HAS A LEGAL AND BINDING CONTRACT FOR SUCH SERVICES, AND HAS NO VALID BASIS FOR CANCELLATION. THE DEPARTMENT STATES, HOWEVER, THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR SERVICES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1970 (JULY 1, 1969, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1970) WILL BE ADVERTISED AND THAT YOUR BID WILL BE SOLICITED AT THAT TIME. FURTHER, THE PROCURING ACTIVITY HAS STATED THAT THE OPTION RESERVED TO THE GOVERNMENT TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS BEYOND JUNE 30, 1969, WILL NOT BE EXERCISED UNLESS SOME PROBLEM OR UNFORESEEN COMPLICATION OCCURS AND CAUSES DELAY IN ISSUING THE CONTRACT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1970 REQUIREMENTS.

THE EFFECT OF OUR DECISION OF JUNE 13, 1967, WAS TO CONSIDER THE CONTRACT AS A VALID CONTRACT FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 1966, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1969, SUBJECT TO CANCELLATION AFTER THE FIRST PROGRAM YEAR ONLY UNDER THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS, IN WHICH EVENT PROCUREMENT FROM ANY SOURCE FOR THE PROGRAM YEAR/S) INVOLVED WOULD NOT BE EFFECTED, OR TO TERMINATION UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES PURSUANT TO THE CLAUSES RELATING TO DEFAULT OR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY BASIS FOR DEFAULT TERMINATION OF INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS' CONTRACT. ADDITIONALLY, THE PRESENT RECORD CONTAINS NOTHING WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT THE LABOR SITUATION, WAGE RATES, OR OTHER MATERIAL FACTORS HAVE SO CHANGED IN THE PAST TWO YEARS AS TO SUPPORT OR REQUIRE A CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD NOW BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT TO TERMINATE THE REMAINDER OF INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS' CONTRACT UNDER THE TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT PROVISIONS, AND YOUR STATEMENT THAT YOU WOULD BID LESS THAN THE PRESENT CONTRACT PRICE IF AGAIN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE IS INSUFFICIENT IN ITSELF TO JUSTIFY SUCH TERMINATION ACTION.

ACCORDINGLY, WE SEE NO PROPER BASIS ON WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE COULD BE DIRECTED TO READVERTISE THE NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1969, AND YOUR PROTEST MUST THEREFORE BE DENIED.

Jan 14, 2021

Jan 13, 2021

Looking for more? Browse all our products here