B-160149, DEC. 29, 1966

B-160149, DEC. 29, 1966

TO GADSBY, MAGUIRE, HANNAH AND MERRIGAN:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1966, AND YOUR LETTERS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1966, AND OCTOBER 25, 1966, PROTESTING IN BEHALF OF MR. IRVING REINGOLD AND TETERBORO FLIGHT TEST CENTER THE PROPOSED AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANOTHER BIDDER BY THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (HEREAFTER GSA) UNDER INVITATION TO BID NO. 8 UPS-67-71.

THE FACTS IN THIS CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS:

FIVE SURPLUS, PRIMARY JET TRAINER AIRCRAFT WERE OFFERED BY THE DENVER REGIONAL OFFICE, GSA, ON THEIR SALES INVITATION NO. 8 UPS-67-16 WHICH WAS DISTRIBUTED TO 945 POTENTIAL BIDDERS ON THEIR MAILING LIST. A PAID ADVERTISEMENT IN THE "TRADE-A-PLANE" PUBLICATION AND AN ADVERTISEMENT IN THE "COMMERCE DAILY" PUBLICATION, ALONG WITH NEWS RELEASE IN SEVERAL AVIATION JOURNALS AND PERIODICALS RESULTED IN THE RECEIPT OF 53 BIDS RANGING IN PRICE FROM $1.00 TO $37,500.00. BID DEPOSITS OF 20 PERCENT OF THE PRICE BID WERE REQUIRED BY THE INVITATION. MR. IRVING REINGOLD, T/A NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, 175 ESSEX STREET, HACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY, SUBMITTED THE SECOND HIGHEST BID. HOWEVER, THIS BID AND THE HIGHEST BID WERE DETERMINED TO BE NONRESPONSIVE INASMUCH AS THEIR BID DEPOSITS WERE IN THE FORM OF COMPANY CHECKS AND WERE NOT ACCEPTABLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE. THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE PROVIDED:

"1. BID DEPOSIT. WHERE A BID DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED BY THE INVITATION, SUCH DEPOSIT MUST ACCOMPANY THE BID AND BE FURNISHED IN CASH, OR BY POSTAL OR EXPRESS MONEY ORDER; CASHIER-S, CERTIFIED, OR TRAVELER'S CHECK; OR A COMBINATION THEREOF; MADE PAYABLE TO THE GOVERNMENT AGENCY CONDUCTING THE SALE UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED IN THE INVITATION.'

WHEN THE ACQUISITION COST OF PROPERTY TO BE SOLD IS OVER $1 MILLION THE REGIONAL CONTRACTING OFFICER IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE BIDS TO THE WASHINGTON CENTRAL OFFICE FOR APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSIONER, PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL DIVISION. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE BIDS WERE FORWARDED TO WASHINGTON AND UPON REVIEWING THE PROPOSED SALE THE CENTRAL OFFICE RECOMMENDED THAT INVITATION NO. 8 UPS-67-16 BE CANCELLED SINCE THE BIDS RECEIVED WERE EITHER NOT RESPONSIVE TO THE INVITATION OR NOT ACCEPTABLE AS TO PRICE. ALL DEPOSITS WERE DIRECTED TO BE RETURNED TO THE BIDDERS ALONG WITH INFORMATION THAT THE AIRCRAFT WOULD BE REOFFERED FOR SALE. THE CHECK SUBMITTED BY MR. IRVING REINGOLD, T/A NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, HOWEVER, WAS DIRECTED TO BE WITHHELD. THE REGIONAL OFFICE WAS INFORMED THAT THIS CONCERN WAS PLACED ON THE DEBARRED BIDDERS LIST FOR A TWO-YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING NOVEMBER 4, 1965, FOR FAILURE TO COMPLETE CONTRACTS (DISCUSSED BELOW) AND WAS INDEBTED TO THE NEW YORK REGIONAL OFFICE BECAUSE OF CERTAIN DEFAULTS.

ON SEPTEMBER 2, 1966, THE DENVER REGIONAL OFFICE READVERTISED THE JET TRAINERS UNDER INVITATION TO BID NO. 8 UPS-67-71. PURSUANT TO TELEPHONIC REQUEST BY MR. REINGOLD THE REGIONAL OFFICE SENT HIM A COPY OF THE INVITATION. BIDS WERE OPENED SEPTEMBER 20, 1966, AND THE BID SUBMITTED BY MR. REINGOLD, NOW TRADING AS TETERBORO FLIGHT TEST CENTER, 175 ESSEX STREET, HACKENSACK, NEW JERSY, APPEARED HIGH. THE REGIONAL OFFICE FORWARDED THE BIDS TO THE CENTRAL OFFICE REQUESTING A DECISION SO THAT SALE OF THE AIRCRAFT COULD BE COMPLETED AND NOTING THAT MR. REINGOLD APPEARED ON THEIR DEBARRED BIDDERS LIST. PENDING FINAL DETERMINATION BY THE CENTRAL OFFICE THIS PROTEST WAS LODGED WITH THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE.

THE RECORD FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE BY GSA REVEALS THAT THE SALES CONTRACTS REFERRED TO UNDER WHICH MR. REINGOLD WAS IN DEFAULT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. SALE NO. 2 UPS-65-341 DATED APRIL 26, 1965; CONTRACT NO. A-845 11. THE HIGH BIDS OF IRVING REINGOLD, NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, ON 9 ITEMS WERE ACCEPTED ON MAY 17, 1965. THESE ITEMS CONSISTED OF A TAR KETTLE, 3 FORK LIFT TRUCKS, 2 SEMI-TRAILERS, 2 PUMPS, AND A GEAR HOBBING MACHINE. FULL PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,345 WAS MADE BY MR. REINGOLD ON CHECK DATED MAY 25, 1965, DRAWN ON THE ACCOUNT OF "WAREHOUSE MACHINERY SALES PLAN, INC --- IRVING REINGOLD.' MR. WILLIE BOONE, A DRIVER FOR, AND AGENT OF, MR. REINGOLD, PRESENTED THE "NOTICE OF AWARD," RECEIVED BY MR. REINGOLD, TO MR. LAWRENCE C. POND, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DELAWARE STATE AGENCY FOR SURPLUS PROPERTY, DELAWARE CITY, DELAWARE, AND TOOK DELIVERY OF ONE OF THE TWO TRAILERS ON MAY 28, 1965. BOTH THESE TRAILERS WERE LOADED WITH THE EQUIPMENT MR. REINGOLD HAD PURCHASED. MR. BOONE RETURNED ON MAY 29, 1965, AND PICKED UP THE SECOND TRAILER. PAYMENT ON MR. REINGOLD'S CHECK OF $3,345 WAS STOPPED AFTER DELIVERY WAS MADE. THEREAFTER, ON JUNE 2, 1965, MR. BOONE RETURNED TO DELAWARE CITY AND ATTEMPTED TO RETURN ONE OF THESE TRAILERS WHICH WAS STILL LOADED WITH THE EQUIPMENT PURCHASED. MR. POND INSISTED THAT THE TRAILER BE REMOVED, AND MR. BOONE COMPLIED. IT WAS OBSERVED BY MR. POND THAT THE CLARK FORK LIFT TRUCK LOADED ON THE TRAILER WAS SERIOUSLY DAMAGED, APPARENTLY BY BEING DRIVEN UNDER A LOW OBSTRUCTION WHILE IN TRANSIT. ON JUNE 10, 1965, ANOTHER ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO RETURN AND DROP BOTH TRAILERS AT THESE SAME PREMISES. PERMISSION TO DO SO WAS AGAIN REFUSED, WHEREUPON THE TRUCKERS TOOK THE TRAILERS OFF THE PREMISES AND PARKED THEM ADJACENT TO A DELAWARE STATE HIGHWAY. DELAWARE STATE POLICE SENT A TELEGRAM TO NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY REQUESTING REMOVAL OF THE PROPERTY, BUT NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIVED. THE PROPERTY WAS REMOVED AT STATE POLICE DIRECTION BY A TOWING COMPANY AND SOLD AT A GARAGE KEEPER'S SALE FOLLOWING NOTIFICATION BY CERTIFIED MAIL ADDRESSED TO NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY. THE RECORD ALSO INCLUDES A COPY OF TELEGRAM DATED JUNE 10, 1965, FROM GSA TO NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY. AN EXPLANATION FOR THE ACTION TAKEN WAS REQUESTED, ALONG WITH NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTOR OF INTENT TO DEBAR. THIS TELEGRAM APPARENTLY WENT UNANSWERED.

2. SALE NO. 2 UPS-65-361 DATED MAY 3, 1965; CONTRACT NOS. A-84575 AND A- 84576. THE HIGH BIDS OF IRVING REINGOLD, NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, WERE ACCEPTED FOR 2 ITEMS ON MAY 21, 1965. BOTH ITEMS WERE GASOLINE OPERATED FOK LIFT TRUCKS. A CHECK DRAWN ON THE ACCOUNT OF "WAREHOUSE MACHINERY SALES PLAN, INC. - IRVING REINGOLD," IN THE AMOUNT OF $850.00 WAS SIGNED BY IRVING REINGOLD AS FULL PAYMENT FOR THESE TRUCKS. WHEN GSA ATTEMPTED TO CASH THIS CHECK IT WAS NOTIFIED THAT PAYMENT WAS STOPPED. NO DELIVERY OF THE GOODS HAD TAKEN PLACE AND NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY WAS ASSESSED LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IN THE AMOUNT OF 20 PERCENT OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, OR $170.00.

3. SALE NO. 2 UPS-65-363 DATED MAY 10, 1965, CONTRACT NO. 84642. THE HIGH BID OF IRVING REINGOLD, NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, WAS ACCEPTED ON JUNE 1, 1965, FOR AN ELECTRIC MONORAIL HOIST IN THE AMOUNT OF $655.55. PAYMENT WAS MADE AND THERE WAS NO DELIVERY. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES OF 20 PERCENT OF THE PURCHASE PRICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $131.11 WERE ASSESSED BECAUSE OF DEFAULT.

BY CERTIFIED LETTERS DATED OCTOBER 18, 1965, IRVING REINGOLD, NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, AND WAREHOUSE MACHINERY SALES PLAN, INC., WERE NOTIFIED THAT THEIR NAMES WERE BEING REMOVED FROM THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION MAILING LISTS BECAUSE OF THEIR FAILURE IN COMPLETING THE THREE CONTRACTS MENTIONED ABOVE. THESE LETTERS ALSO INCLUDED NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO DEBAR, AND STATED:

"* * * THIS PROPOSED DEBARMENT WILL BE FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD. UNLESS A REQUEST FOR A HEARING IS RECEIVED BY THIS OFFICE WITHIN 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS LETTER, THE DEBARMENT WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE WHEN SUCH 15-DAY PERIOD HAS ELAPSED.'

THE LETTERS WERE RECEIVED OCTOBER 19, 1965. NO HEARING WAS REQUESTED WITHIN 15 DAYS, AND THE DEBARMENT BECAME EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 4, 1965.

IN YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 25, 1966, YOU MAKE A NUMBER OF ARGUMENTS AND CONTENTIONS IN BEHALF OF MR. REINGOLD SUPPORTING YOUR POSITION THAT AWARD OF CONTRACT UNDER INVITATION NO. 8 UPS-67-71 SHOULD BE MADE TO MR. IRVING REINGOLD, T/A TETERBORO FLIGHT TEST CENTER.

WE AGREE WITH YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE RETENTION BY GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION OF $3,646.11 OF THE $7,111.10 BID DEPOSIT REPRESENTING PRIOR INDEBTEDNESS AS A RESULT OF THE AFOREMENTIONED DEFAULTED CONTRACTS WAS IMPROPER, AND WE ARE SO ADVISING GSA.

YOUR CONTENTION IN THE ALTERNATIVE, THAT RETENTION OF THE BID DEPOSIT BY GSA ELIMINATES THE CAUSE FOR ANY DEBARMENT AS PAST INDEBTEDNESS WOULD BE EXTINGUISHED IS WHOLLY WITHOUT AUTHORITY. YOUR LETTER CONSTANTLY REFERS TO THE DEBARMENT OF MR. IRVING REINGOLD, NEW JERSEY AIR COMPANY, AND WAREHOUSE MACHINERY SALES PLAN, INC., AS A "PAST DEBARMENT.' THE FACT IS THAT THE DEBARMENT IS CURRENT AND PRESENT AND REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL NOVEMBER 4, 1967. YOU CITE 41 CFR 1-1.604 (C) AS AUTHORITY TO REMOVE THE DEBARMENT OR REDUCE THE PERIOD THEREOF UPON PROOF OF "THE ELIMINATION OF THE CAUSES FOR WHICH THE DEBARMENT WAS IMPOSED.' WHAT THIS PROVISION ACTUALLY STATES IS THAT UPON THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION, SUPPORTED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, SETTING FORTH APPROPRIATE GROUNDS FOR THE GRANTING OF RELIEF -- SUCH AS NEWLY DISCOVERED MATERIAL EVIDENCE, REVERSAL OF A CONVICTION, BONA FIDE CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP OR MANAGEMENT, OR THE ELIMINATION OF THE CAUSES FOR WHICH DEBARMENT WAS IMPOSED - A DEBARMENT MAY BE REMOVED, OR MAY BE REDUCED.

NO APPLICATION SETTING FORTH THESE GROUNDS WAS SUBMITTED BY THE PARTIES IN QUESTION. FURTHERMORE, THE CAUSE FOR DEBARMENT WAS NOT PRIOR INDEBTEDNESS, BUT A RECORD OF FAILURE TO PERFORM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THREE CONTRACTS. SEE 41 CFR 1-1.604 (A) (3) (II). THE BIDDERS ON THESE GOVERNMENT SALES CONTRACTS WERE CAUTIONED TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BIDS. THE INVITATIONS PROVIDED THAT ALL PROPERTY WAS OFFERED FOR SALE "AS IS" AND ,WHERE IS," AND THAT THE GOVERNMENT MADE NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS, OR IMPLIED, AS TO QUANTITY, KIND, CHARACTER, QUALITY, WEIGHT, SIZE, OR DESCRIPTION OF ANY OF THE PROPERTY, OR ITS FITNESS FOR ANY USE OR PURPOSE. ACCORDING TO YOUR LETTER MR. REINGOLD'S REASONS FOR ISSUING STOP PAYMENT ORDERS ON CHECKS IN THE ABOVE-CITED INSTANCES WAS THAT HE DID NOT CONSIDER THE PROPERTY PURCHASED TO BE EQUAL IN QUALITY TO THE AMOUNT BID. YOU HAVE SUBMITTED NO EVIDENCE THAT AN INSPECTION WAS MADE OF ANY OF THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO ITS PURCHASE IN ANY OF THE CONTRACTS UPON WHICH HE DEFAULTED, NOR HAVE YOU SUBMITTED EVIDENCE TO THE EFFECT THAT MR. REINGOLD BID ON PROPERTY OTHER THAN THAT WHICH WAS SOLD TO HIM. NO NEW EVIDENCE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY CONCERNED OR OUR OFFICE WHICH SHOWS THE ELIMINATION OF THE CAUSES FOR WHICH THE DEBARMENT WAS IMPOSED.

AMONG THE SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS BEGINNING ON PAGE 6 OF YOUR OCTOBER 25 LETTER ARE THE FOLLOWING: ,DEBARMENT UPON A PAST CONTRACT IS NOT BY ITSELF CAUSE FOR DISQUALIFICATION BY GSA OF THE HIGHEST BIDDER AS A NON- RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. SUCH PAST DEBARMENT MUST BE EVALUATED ALONG WITH OTHER SPECIFIC STANDARDS SET FORTH IN 41 CFR 1-1.310-5 AS TO QUALIFICATION OF A PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTOR AND A CONTRACTOR'S CURRENT FINANCIAL CAPABILITIES MUST BE CONSIDERED BY CONTRACTING OFFICER.'

AS WE HAVE ALREADY POINTED OUT, THE DEBARMENT REFERRED TO IN THIS CASE IS NOT A PAST DEBARMENT. IT IS PRESENT AND CURRENT AND ITSELF SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO DISQUALIFY A PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTOR. SEE 41 CFR 1 1.310-7 WHEREIN IT STATES:

"BEFORE MAKING A DETERMINATION OF RESPONSIBILITY, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER SHALL HAVE SUFFICIENT CURRENT INFORMATION TO SATISFY HIMSELF THAT THE PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTOR MEETS THE STANDARDS IN 1-1.310-5. INFORMATION FROM THE FOLLOWING SOURCES SHOULD BE UTILIZED * * *.

"/B) * * * THE LIST OF DEBARRED AND INELIGIBLE BIDDERS * * *.'

41 CFR 1-2.404-2 (D), REJECTION OF INDIVIDUAL BIDS, PROVIDES:

"/A) "DEBARMENT" MEANS, IN GENERAL, AN EXCLUSION FROM GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING * * *.'

41 CFR 1-2.404-2 (D), REJECTION OF/INDIVIDUAL BIDS, PROVIDES:

"/D) BIDS RECEIVED FROM ANY PERSON OR CONCERN DEBARRED OR INELIGIBLE SHALL BE REJECTED IF THE PERIOD OF DEBARMENT OR INELIGIBILITY HAS NOT EXPIRED.'

YOU ARGUE THAT,"BECAUSE GSA BY WRITTEN INVITATION TO BID LED THE BIDDER TO BELIEVE THAT HIS BID WOULD BE CONSIDERED, THE RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO A DEBARRED BIDDER SHOULD BE WAIVED.' IT MUST BE POINTED OUT THAT THE REGIONAL OFFICE, BY SENDING AN INVITATION TO MR. REINGOLD, ACTED WITHOUT AUTHORITY SINCE MR. REINGOLD WAS ON THE DEBARRED BIDDERS LIST. PUBLISHED DECISION 36 COMP. GEN. 532, WHERE A CONTRACT AWARD WAS INADVERTENTLY MADE TO A DEBARRED BIDDER, IT WAS HELD THAT THE CONTRACT WAS VOIDABLE AT THE OPTION OF THE GOVERNMENT. THE QUESTION OF THE SCOPE OF AUTHORITY EXERCISED BY OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT WAS DEALT WITH AT PAGE 535:

"ALL OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT ARE AGENTS WITH DELEGATED POWERS WHO MUST ACT WITHIN LEGALLY PRESCRIBED LIMITATIONS IF THEIR ACTS ARE TO BIND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 91 C.J.S. UNITED STATES SECTION 38. THE AUTHORITY OF AN AGENT MAY BE RESTRICTED AS TO THE PERSONS WITH WHOM HE IS AUTHORIZED TO DEAL. 2 AM.JUR. AGENCY SECTION 128. ONE WHO DEALS WITH AN AGENT KNOWING THAT HE IS CLOTHED WITH A CIRCUMSCRIBED AUTHORITY AND THAT HIS ACT TRANSCENDS HIS POWERS, CANNOT HOLD THE AGENT'S PRINCIPAL. SLOCUM V. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 228 U.S. 364, 374.' SINCE THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT REGULATIONS ARE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER, ONE WHO DEALS WITH AN AGENT OF THE GOVERNMENT IS CHARGED WITH NOTICE OF THEIR CONTENT. THEREFORE, A BIDDER ON THE DEBARRED BIDDERS LIST IS EXCLUDED FROM GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT OR IGNORANCE OF THE FACT OF DEBARMENT PROMPTED AN INVITATION TO BID TO BE SENT TO HIM. YOU FURTHER CONTEND THAT,"A PROSPECTIVE CORPORATE CONTRACTOR SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED BY A PREVIOUS DEBARMENT IMPOSED UPON A PRINCIPAL OFFICER.' INITIALLY, IT MUST BE STATED THAT DEBARMENT IS NOT A PENAL MEASURE IMPOSED UPON CONTRACTORS, ITS PURPOSE IS TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF THE GOVERNMENT. 41 CFR 1-1.601. IF THE TERM "CORPORATE CONTRACTOR" REFERS TO TETERBORO FLIGHT TEST CENTER THERE IS AN INCONSISTENCY IN YOUR CONTENTION. TETERBORO FLIGHT TEST CENTER IS NOT A CORPORATION INCORPORATED IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, OR IN ANY OTHER STATE OR DISTRICT. THIS WAS CONFIRMED BY YOU IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATION OF NOVEMBER 28, 1966, WITH OUR OFFICE. THE BID SUBMITTED BY IRVING REINGOLD, T/A TETERBORO FLIGHT TEST CENTER, MUST BE CONSIDERED AS THE INDIVIDUAL BID OF MR. REINGOLD. AS A DEBARRED BIDDER HIS BID CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FOR AWARD. IN ANSWER TO YOUR CONTENTION, THE REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT DEBARMENT IS NOT LIMITED SOLELY TO THE INDIVIDUAL DEBARRED BUT ALSO INCLUDES THE NAMES OF ANY CONCERN, CORPORATION, PARTNERSHIP, OR ASSOCIATION IN WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL HAS CONTROLLING INTEREST. SEE 41 CFR 1-1.603 (A) AND 41 CFR 1-1.604 (C). THE DEBARMENT PROCEDURE WOULD BE RENDERED INEFFECTIVE IF THE OFFICERS OF A DEBARRED CORPORATION, OR THE PARTNERS OF A DEBARRED PARTNERSHIP, OR THE MEMBERS OF A DEBARRED ASSOCIATION COULD EVADE THE OPERATION OF DEBARMENT BY DISSOLUTION OF ONE CONCERN AND FORMATION OF ANOTHER. SEE B-146426, SEPTEMBER 20, 1961.

OUR OFFICE HAS CONSISTENTLY TAKEN THE POSITION THAT CONTRACTING AGENCIES MUST OBSERVE CERTAIN SAFEGUARDS AND LIMITATIONS IN THE USE OF NONSTATUTORY DEBARMENTS. THE CONDITIONS AND CAUSES FOR DEBARMENT AS SET FORTH IN THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT REGULATIONS AND PUBLISHED IN 41 CFR OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER ARE LARGELY A COLLECTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH WE HAVE CONCURRED IN DEBARMENT ACTIONS.

WE HAVE CAREFULLY REVIEWED THE RECORD IN THIS MATTER AND IT IS OUR OPINION THAT DEBARMENT ACTION WAS UNDERTAKEN IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. UPON HIS REFUSAL TO PERFORM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITED SALES CONTRACTS YOUR CLIENT WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROPOSED DEBARMENT AND AFFORDED A 15-DAY PERIOD IN WHICH TO PRESENT INFORMATION IN HIS OWN BEHALF. HE FAILED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND HIS ACTIONS AND THERE WAS NO INFORMATION TO REBUT THE CONCLUSION THAT HIS BREACH OF THE CONTRACTS WAS A FAILURE TO PERFORM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR TERMS. THE SAFEGUARD OF ADEQUATE NOTICE WHICH THIS OFFICE REQUIRES WAS OBSERVED. FURTHERMORE, WHILE THE REGULATIONS AUTHORIZE DEBARMENT FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS, THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY DETERMINED THAT A TWO- YEAR PERIOD OF DEBARMENT WAS REASONABLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. WE CONCUR IN THIS DETERMINATION.

FOR THESE REASONS, YOUR PROTEST AGAINST AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF THE JET TRAINERS IS DENIED.