B-159108, AUG. 2, 1966
Highlights
THE DECISION IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN BASED ON A FINDING OF PRIOR USE. THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND OF YOUR PROTEST IS MORE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR LETTER TO YOU OF JUNE 7. IN WHICH WE NOTED THE PROCURING ACTIVITY'S REPORT THAT ITS FAILURE TO REVIEW YOUR UNTIMELY PROPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASPR 3-506 WAS AN OVERSIGHT. YOU HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE INVITATION. SUCH FINAL ACTION ON YOUR LATE PROPOSAL IS PERMITTED UNDER SUBPARAGRAPH (A) OF ASPR 3 -506 WHICH PROVIDES THAT "ONLY" THE SECRETARY CONCERNED MAY AUTHORIZE THE CONSIDERATION OF A LATE PROPOSAL. IN VIEW OF SUCH BROAD ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION WHICH IS VESTED SOLELY WITH THE . WE PERCEIVE NO PROPER BASIS ON WHICH WE MAY QUESTION THE SECRETARY'S APPARENT DETERMINATION THAT YOUR LATE PROPOSAL IS NOT OF SUCH EXTREME IMPORTANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT SO AS TO WARRANT FURTHER CONSIDERATION.
B-159108, AUG. 2, 1966
TO INTERCEPT RESEARCH, INC.:
IN YOUR TELEGRAM OF JULY 21, 1966, YOU PROTEST A DECISION BY THE NAVAL SHIPS SYSTEM COMMAND THAT YOUR LATE PROPOSAL, SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS (RFQ) 681BA-69070/S), DID NOT OFFER AN IMPORTANT TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH, AS PRESCRIBED IN ASPR 3-506 AS A BASIS ON WHICH THE SECRETARY CONCERNED MAY AUTHORIZE THE CONSIDERATION OF A LATE PROPOSAL. THE DECISION IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN BASED ON A FINDING OF PRIOR USE. YOU REQUEST A "MEETING WITH TECHNICAL BOARD AT WHICH PRIOR USE CAN BE DEMONSTRATED TO OUR SATISFACTION.'
THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND OF YOUR PROTEST IS MORE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR LETTER TO YOU OF JUNE 7, 1966, IN WHICH WE NOTED THE PROCURING ACTIVITY'S REPORT THAT ITS FAILURE TO REVIEW YOUR UNTIMELY PROPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASPR 3-506 WAS AN OVERSIGHT, AND THAT IT HAD THEREFORE INVITED YOU TO RESUBMIT YOUR PROPOSAL FOR CONSIDERATION OF WHETHER IT DID IN FACT OFFER AN IMPORTANT TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH. APPARENTLY, YOU HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE INVITATION.
IN OUR LETTER WE ADVISED YOU THAT IF THE REVIEW FAILED TO DISCLOSE SUCH A BREAKTHROUGH, YOUR PROPOSAL WOULD BE RETURNED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY WITH ADVICE THAT IT WOULD NOT BE FURTHER CONSIDERED. SUCH FINAL ACTION ON YOUR LATE PROPOSAL IS PERMITTED UNDER SUBPARAGRAPH (A) OF ASPR 3 -506 WHICH PROVIDES THAT "ONLY" THE SECRETARY CONCERNED MAY AUTHORIZE THE CONSIDERATION OF A LATE PROPOSAL, AND ONLY FOR THE REASON THAT SUCH CONSIDERATION WOULD BE OF EXTREME IMPORTANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT AS IN THE CASE OF A PROPOSAL OFFERING A SIGNIFICANT TECHNICAL OR SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGH. IN VIEW OF SUCH BROAD ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION WHICH IS VESTED SOLELY WITH THE ,SECRETARY CONCERNED" AND SINCE THIS OFFICE HAS NEITHER A SCIENTIFIC NOR ENGINEERING STAFF FOR EVALUATING THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF PROPOSALS AND MUST RELY IN SUCH MATTERS ON THE OPINIONS OF THE QUALIFIED EXPERTS OF THE AGENCIES CONCERNED, WE PERCEIVE NO PROPER BASIS ON WHICH WE MAY QUESTION THE SECRETARY'S APPARENT DETERMINATION THAT YOUR LATE PROPOSAL IS NOT OF SUCH EXTREME IMPORTANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT SO AS TO WARRANT FURTHER CONSIDERATION.
WE SUGGEST THEREFORE THAT YOUR REQUEST FOR A MEETING WITH A "TECHNICAL BOARD" TO DISCUSS YOUR PROPOSAL BE DIRECTED TO THE PROCURING ACTIVITY INVOLVED.