Outdoor Venture Corporation
Highlights
A firm protested an Army Materiel Command (AMC) rejection of its proposal and contract award for lightweight maintenance enclosures and associated spare and repair parts, contending that AMC (1) improperly rejected the protester's proposal as technically unacceptable; and (2) unfairly decided to award the contract to one firm. GAO held that AMC (1) properly rejected the bid as technically unacceptable after initially having included it in competitive range; and (2) fairly made a sole award of the contract because the solicitation provision that multiple awards are anticipated does not obligate AMC to make more than one award when only one technically acceptable proposal is received. Accordingly, the protest was denied.
B-166559, APR. 28, 1969
TO MR. BRUCE E. FRANCONE:
YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 12, 1969, IS BEING CONSIDERED IN THE NATURE OF AN APPEAL FROM OUR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACTION OF FEBRUARY 25, 1969, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, TO LAS CRUCES, NEW MEXICO, INCIDENT TO YOUR EMPLOYMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY.
FROM THE RECORD BEFORE US, YOU INCURRED ACTUAL EXPENSES OF $738.35 FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS. PRIOR TO YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT YOU DISCUSSED WITH THE STAFFING PERSONNEL AT WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE AT SOME LENGTH THE PROCEDURE INVOLVED IN ACCOMPLISHING THE TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS. UNFORTUNATELY AND UNINTENTIONALLY YOU DID NOT GET A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE GOVERNMENT COULD REIMBURSE YOU FOR THE SUBJECT SHIPMENT. SUCH REIMBURSEMENT ACCORDING TO COPIES OF THE TWO VOUCHERS ON FILE WITH US (408790 OF JUNE 11, 1968, AND 401166 OF AUGUST 22, 1968) AMOUNTED TO $570.80 AND $12.15, RESPECTIVELY.
AS INDICATED IN OUR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 25 THE PAYMENT TO YOU ACCORDS WITH THE LAW AND THE REGULATIONS ISSUED IN IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF. SEE 5 U.S.C. 5724 (C), BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A 56, AND GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION BULLETIN FPMR NO. A-2. THE FACT THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISINFORMED IN THE MATTER AFFORDS NO BASIS FOR OUR OFFICE TO ALLOW YOU ANY GREATER AMOUNT THAN THAT PERMITTED BY SUCH LAW AND REGULATIONS. ACCORDINGLY, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.