B-133390, OCT. 24, 1961
Highlights
WE HAVE EXAMINED FURTHER INTO THE PROCUREMENT BY THE UNITED STATES ARMY CHEMICAL PROCUREMENT DISTRICT. WHILE THERE WERE EXTENSIONS OF DELIVERY DATES AND LATE DELIVERY OF THE VESICANT DETECTOR CRAYONS PURCHASED IN 1959. THE EXTENSIONS WERE GRANTED BECAUSE CERTAIN GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED MATERIAL WAS FOUND UNSUITABLE. THE QUANTITIES OF THE ITEMS CONTRACTED FOR WERE INCREASED. THE GOVERNMENT WAS PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DELAYS IN PRODUCTION AND APPROVAL OF THE PILOT LOT. WE ARE UNABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT THE FAILURE TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT CONSTITUTED FAVORITISM OR THAT THE JUSTIFICATION PRESENTED BY THE CHEMICAL CORPS IS INSUFFICIENT AS A BASIS FOR THE EXTENSIONS OF DELIVERY ALLOWED. WE WERE INFORMED BY THE ARMY CHEMICAL CENTER.
B-133390, OCT. 24, 1961
TO THE GLOBE CRAYON CORPORATION:
WITH RESPECT TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1961, WE HAVE EXAMINED FURTHER INTO THE PROCUREMENT BY THE UNITED STATES ARMY CHEMICAL PROCUREMENT DISTRICT, NEW YORK, OF ANTI-DIM SETS AND VESICANT DETECTOR CRAYONS. OUR ADDITIONAL REVIEW DID NOT DISCLOSE ANY FACTS TO CHANGE OUR OPINION AS TO THE LEGALITY OF THE AWARDS IN QUESTION OR AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF THE ACTIONS OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY CHEMICAL PROCUREMENT DISTRICT, NEW YORK, AS REPORTED IN OUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1961.
WHILE THERE WERE EXTENSIONS OF DELIVERY DATES AND LATE DELIVERY OF THE VESICANT DETECTOR CRAYONS PURCHASED IN 1959, THE EXTENSIONS WERE GRANTED BECAUSE CERTAIN GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED MATERIAL WAS FOUND UNSUITABLE, THE QUANTITIES OF THE ITEMS CONTRACTED FOR WERE INCREASED, AND THE GOVERNMENT WAS PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DELAYS IN PRODUCTION AND APPROVAL OF THE PILOT LOT. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE UNABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT THE FAILURE TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT CONSTITUTED FAVORITISM OR THAT THE JUSTIFICATION PRESENTED BY THE CHEMICAL CORPS IS INSUFFICIENT AS A BASIS FOR THE EXTENSIONS OF DELIVERY ALLOWED.
IN REGARD TO YOUR STATEMENT CONCERNING THE QUALITY OF THE VESICANT CRAYONS DELIVERED BY THE CONTRACTOR, WE REVIEWED THE INSPECTION REPORTS FOR THE QUANTITIES DELIVERED AND FOUND THAT ALL INSPECTIONS SHOWED COMPLIANCE WITH CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS. WE FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF ANY CHANGE IN CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS. ALSO, WE WERE INFORMED BY THE ARMY CHEMICAL CENTER, EDGEWOOD, MARYLAND, THAT THE CRAYONS FURNISHED UNDER THE CONTRACT AND IN STORAGE AT ARMY DEPOTS HAD PASSED SEVERAL SURVEILLANCE TESTS AND THAT NO DEFECTIVE STOCK HAD BEEN FOUND.
YOU ALSO QUESTION THE PROPRIETY OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S HAVING REQUESTED INFORMATION AS TO FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PRIOR TO ADDING YOUR FIRM'S NAME TO HIS QUALIFIED BIDDERS LIST FOR ANTI-DIM SETS. IN REGARD TO THIS POINT, YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS OF SECTIONS 2-205 AND 16-810 OF THE ARMED SERVICES PROCUREMENT REGULATION. THE BIDDERS MAILING LIST APPLICATION FORMS MENTIONED IN THE REGULATION PROVIDE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF FINANCIAL DATA FOR USE IN DETERMINING QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS. THEREFORE, THE ACTIONS OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER IN THIS RESPECT WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS INVOLVED.
WE ARE SENDING A COPY OF THIS LETTER TO THE HONORABLE F. EDWARD HERBERT, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE FOR SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.