Skip to main content

B-157052, AUG. 16, 1965

B-157052 Aug 16, 1965
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE: ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY TO ALEXANDER BOSKOFF. THIS MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF YOUR REPORT OF JULY 16. THE PURCHASE ACTION WAS CONDUCTED UNDER THE SMALL PURCHASES PROCEDURES ON THE BASIS THAT THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE THREE-MONTH PROCUREMENT WAS LESS THAN $2. WE HAVE STATED THAT THE SPLITTING OF NEEDS SO THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL PURCHASE WILL BE WITHIN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY STATUTE FOR OPEN MARKET PURCHASES IS NOT AUTHORIZED. WHERE THERE IS A CONTINUING NEED FOR SUPPLIES OR SERVICES OF THE SAME CHARACTER. WILL EXCEED. WE BELIEVE THAT AN EXTENSION OF THE PURCHASE ORDER COMPLETION DATE UNDER THE OPTION WOULD BE TANTAMOUNT TO A SPLITTING OF THE PROCUREMENT AND WOULD NOT BE AUTHORIZED UNDER THE SMALL PURCHASE STATUTE AND REGULATIONS IF THE TOTAL ANTICIPATED COSTS OF THE PURCHASE ORDER AS EXTENDED WERE TO EXCEED THE STATUTORY LIMIT OF $2.

View Decision

B-157052, AUG. 16, 1965

TO DR. ALLEN V. AS TIN, DIRECTORS NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE:

ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF TODAY TO ALEXANDER BOSKOFF, ATTORNEY AT LAW, RELATIVE TO THE PROTEST FROM SQUARE DEAL TRUCKING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, AGAINST THE AWARD MADE TO POTOMAC DISPOSAL COMPANY FOR TRASH REMOVAL AT THE BUREAU'S FACILITIES, GAITHERSBURG, MARYLAND, FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 1965, THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1965. THIS MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF YOUR REPORT OF JULY 16, 1965.

THE PURCHASE ACTION WAS CONDUCTED UNDER THE SMALL PURCHASES PROCEDURES ON THE BASIS THAT THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE THREE-MONTH PROCUREMENT WAS LESS THAN $2,500. THE PURCHASE ORDER SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDE, HOWEVER, THAT THE ORDER MAY BE EXTENDED FOR ANY PERIOD BEYOND THE THREE-MONTH COMPLETION DATE OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1965, BUT NOT BEYOND JUNE 30, 1966.

REGARDING THE AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE SUPPLIES OR SERVICES IN THE OPEN MARKET (THE SMALL PURCHASE PROCEDURE), WE HAVE STATED THAT THE SPLITTING OF NEEDS SO THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL PURCHASE WILL BE WITHIN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY STATUTE FOR OPEN MARKET PURCHASES IS NOT AUTHORIZED; AND THAT, WHERE THERE IS A CONTINUING NEED FOR SUPPLIES OR SERVICES OF THE SAME CHARACTER, THE TOTAL COST OF WHICH DURING THE FISCAL YEAR, OR PART THEREOF, WILL EXCEED, OR REASONABLY MAY BE ANTICIPATED TO EXCEED, IN THE AGGREGATE, THE AMOUNT AUTHORIZED TO BE EXPENDED FOR A PROCUREMENT WITHOUT ADVERTISING, THE LAW REQUIRES THAT, WHEN PRACTICABLE, THERE BE FORMAL ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR THE FURNISHING OF SUCH SUPPLIES OR SERVICES. 32428, FEBRUARY 22, 1943. SEE 5 COMP. GEN. 41. IN ARRIVING AT THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT INVOLVED IN ANY ONE TRANSACTION, THERE MUST BE INCLUDED ALL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES WHICH WOULD PROPERLY BE GROUPED TOGETHER IN A SINGLE TRANSACTION AND WHICH WOULD BE INCLUDED IN A SINGLE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS. FPR 1 3.602 (D).

WE BELIEVE THAT AN EXTENSION OF THE PURCHASE ORDER COMPLETION DATE UNDER THE OPTION WOULD BE TANTAMOUNT TO A SPLITTING OF THE PROCUREMENT AND WOULD NOT BE AUTHORIZED UNDER THE SMALL PURCHASE STATUTE AND REGULATIONS IF THE TOTAL ANTICIPATED COSTS OF THE PURCHASE ORDER AS EXTENDED WERE TO EXCEED THE STATUTORY LIMIT OF $2,500. YOUR AGENCY EXPECTS THAT ITS NEEDS WILL BE CRYSTALLIZED BY SEPTEMBER 30, 1965, TO PERMIT ADVERTISING. IN THE EVENT THE NEEDS ARE NOT DEFINITIVE ENOUGH BY THAT DATE, WE SEE NO REASON WHY THE SERVICES IN QUESTION COULD NOT BE PROCURED UNDER APPROPRIATE NEGOTIATING AUTHORITY, SUCH AS IS CONTAINED IN 41 U.S.C. 252 (C) (10) (FOR PROPERTY OR SERVICES FOR WHICH IT IS IMPRACTICABLE TO SECURE COMPETITION). HOWEVER, WE WOULD NOT OBJECT TO A SHORT TIME EXTENSION OF THE PURCHASE ORDER UNDER THE PRESENT NEGOTIATION AUTHORITY, SO LONG AS THE OVERALL ANTICIPATED COSTS REMAIN BELOW THE $2,500 STATUTORY LIMIT.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs