B-167803, DEC. 22, 1969

B-167803: Dec 22, 1969

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

ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION CONCLUSIVENESS ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY'S (ARPA) REJECTION OF WEAPON PROPOSAL ON GROUNDS THAT PROPOSAL INVOLVES NOTHING NEW OR UNIQUE IS SUSTAINED. " ONLY JURISDICTION GAO HAS ASSERTED IN THIS AREA IS TO REQUIRE CANCELLATION PRIOR TO AWARD OF COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENTS UTILIZING INFORMATION WHICH GOVERNMENT DID NOT HAVE RIGHT TO EMPLOY FOR SUCH PURPOSES BUT IN INSTANT CASE THERE IS NO COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT AND NO ALLEGATION OF PUBLIC DISSEMINATION OF FIRM'S DATA. GAO DOES NOT HAVE BEFORE IT ISSUE OF WHETHER PROCUREMENT SHOULD BE CANCELED WITHOUT AWARD. RICHTER AND ASSOCIATES: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 16. THE MOST RECENT CONSIDERATION OF YOUR PROPOSAL WAS BY THE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY (ARPA).

B-167803, DEC. 22, 1969

SPECIFICATIONS--CONFORMABILITY OF EQUIPMENT, ETC; OFFERED--TECHNICAL DEFICIENCIES--ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION CONCLUSIVENESS ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY'S (ARPA) REJECTION OF WEAPON PROPOSAL ON GROUNDS THAT PROPOSAL INVOLVES NOTHING NEW OR UNIQUE IS SUSTAINED, AS ARPA IN REACHING ITS CONCLUSION DID NOT ABUSE DISCRETION AFFORDED ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN SUCH MATTERS. REGARDING ARPA'S ALLEGED VIOLATION OF FIRM'S PROPRIETARY RIGHTS IN CONTRACTING FOR "SIMILAR RESEARCH," ONLY JURISDICTION GAO HAS ASSERTED IN THIS AREA IS TO REQUIRE CANCELLATION PRIOR TO AWARD OF COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENTS UTILIZING INFORMATION WHICH GOVERNMENT DID NOT HAVE RIGHT TO EMPLOY FOR SUCH PURPOSES BUT IN INSTANT CASE THERE IS NO COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT AND NO ALLEGATION OF PUBLIC DISSEMINATION OF FIRM'S DATA. FURTHER, AND MOST IMPORTANT, GAO DOES NOT HAVE BEFORE IT ISSUE OF WHETHER PROCUREMENT SHOULD BE CANCELED WITHOUT AWARD.

TO THEODORE J. RICHTER AND ASSOCIATES:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 16, 1969, AND SUPPLEMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE, PROTESTING THE REJECTION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OF YOUR PROPOSAL KNOWN AS "CYCLOPS.'

BASICALLY, THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES YOUR CONCEPT OF A REMOTELY CONTROLLED DRONE TO DELIVER A 500 POUND CONVENTIONAL BOMB, AND PERFORM RECONNAISSANCE, AIR-TO-AIR COMBAT AND CLOSE SUPPORT MISSIONS. FROM THE RECORD BEFORE THIS OFFICE, IT APPEARS THAT YOU FIRST SUBMITTED YOUR PROPOSAL TO THE GOVERNMENT IN 1967. SINCE THAT TIME IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO AND REJECTED BY SEVERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT DOES NOT INVOLVE ANYTHING NEW OR UNIQUE. THE MOST RECENT CONSIDERATION OF YOUR PROPOSAL WAS BY THE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY (ARPA), DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. BY LETTER DATED MAY 27, 1969, ARPA ADVISED YOU THAT:

"AFTER A CAREFUL EXAMINATION OF YOUR PROPOSAL, A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE THAT SIMILAR RESEARCH IS PRESENTLY BEING CARRIED OUT FOR ARPA AND THEREFORE, WE HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT WE CANNOT CONSIDER SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED WORK.'

YOU CONTEND THAT YOUR PROPOSAL HAS NEVER RECEIVED ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION OR EVALUATION BY ANY GOVERNMENT AGENCY. YOU ALSO QUESTION WHETHER ARPA MADE AN EVALUATION SINCE YOUR EFFORTS TO OBTAIN A COPY OF ANY EVALUATION HAVE BEEN DENIED ON THE BASIS THAT IT IS CLASSIFIED. MOREOVER, YOU CONTEND THAT ARPA'S LETTER OF MAY 27, 1969, INDICATES THAT IT HAS VIOLATED YOUR PROPRIETARY RIGHTS BY CONTRACTING FOR "SIMILAR RESEARCH.'

WE HAVE EXAMINED ARPA'S EVALUATION OF YOUR PROPOSAL. SINCE IT HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED "SECRET" WE ARE UNABLE TO FURNISH YOU A COPY. OBVIOUSLY, WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO EVALUATE YOUR PROPOSAL FROM A TECHNICAL STANDPOINT. SUCH AN ACTION WOULD BE BOTH BEYOND OUR COMPETENCE AND JURISDICTION. HOWEVER, YOUR PROPOSAL APPEARS TO HAVE RECEIVED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CONSIDERATION FROM AN AGENCY CHARGED WITH SUCH FUNCTION AND WITH THE EXPERTISE TO DECIDE THE MATTER. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE, WE CANNOT FIND THE ARPA IN REACHING ITS CONCLUSION ABUSED THE DISCRETION AFFORDED ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN SUCH MATTERS.

WITH RESPECT TO THE PROTECTION OF YOUR PROPRIETARY RIGHTS, THE ONLY JURISDICTION WE HAVE ASSERTED IN THIS AREA IS TO REQUIRE THE CANCELLATION PRIOR TO AWARD OF COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENTS UTILIZING INFORMATION WHICH THE GOVERNMENT DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO EMPLOY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. IN THE INSTANT CASE THERE IS NO COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT AND, AS WE UNDERSTAND, NO ALLEGATION OF PUBLIC DISSEMINATION OF YOUR DATA. FURTHER, AND MOST IMPORTANT, WE DO NOT HAVE BEFORE US THE ISSUE OF WHETHER A PROCUREMENT SHOULD BE CANCELLED WITHOUT AWARD.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE FIND NO BASIS FOR OUR OFFICE TO TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION WITH RESPECT TO YOUR PROTEST. THE FILE LEFT WITH OUR OFFICE IS RETURNED.

Jan 14, 2021

Jan 13, 2021

Looking for more? Browse all our products here