B-143637, OCT. 10, 1960

B-143637, OCT. 10, 1960

TO MANHATTAN LIGHTING EQUIPMENT CO., INC.:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 27, 1960, AND TWO LETTERS OF JULY 30, 1960, PROTESTING AGAINST THE PROBABLE REJECTION OF YOUR BIDS UNDER INVITATIONS NOS. IFB-155-/7-2/-1994-60, IFB-155-/7-6/ 1924 -60 AND IFB-155-/7-3/-2790-60 ISSUED BY THE GENERAL STORES SUPPLY OFFICE, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA; ALSO TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 28, 1960, REQUESTING INFORMATION RELATIVE TO AWARDS UNDER EIGHT INVITATIONS LISTED THEREIN, INCLUDING THE THREE ABOVE DESCRIBED. THERE ALSO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN CONNECTION WITH SOME OF THESE INVITATIONS YOUR LETTERS OF AUGUST 9 (TWO LETTERS), AUGUST 11 (THREE LETTERS), AUGUST 23 (TWO LETTERS) AND AUGUST 24.

INVITATION NO. IFB-155-/7-6/-1923-60 WAS ISSUED JANUARY 11, 1960, REQUESTING BIDS ON HAND TOOLS. YOUR BID ON ITEM NO. 11 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,894.20 LESS A CASH DISCOUNT OF 1 PERCENT 30 DAYS WAS THE LOW BID ON THAT ITEM. THE SECOND LOW BID ON ITEM NO. 11 WAS SUBMITTED BY BICKNELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,100 LESS A CASH DISCOUNT OF 2 PERCENT 30 DAYS. SINCE YOUR CORPORATION WAS REGARDED AS A NONRESPONSIBLE BIDDER ON THE BASIS OF A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT DATED FEBRUARY 19, 1960, BY THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL, NEW YORK, STATING THE CONCLUSION THAT YOUR CORPORATION WAS NOT A RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, THE CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD APPROVED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AND AWARD WAS MADE TO THE SECOND LOW BIDDER ON MAY 25, 1960.

INVITATION NO. IFB-155-/7-3/-2790-60 WAS ISSUED MARCH 18, 1960, REQUESTING BIDS ON FIVE ITEMS OF SUPPLIES. YOU SUBMITTED THE LOW BID ON ITEMS NOS 3 AND 5 AND THE SECOND LOW BID ON ITEM NO. 4. THE LOW BID ON ITEM NO. 4 WAS REJECTED AS NONRESPONSIVE. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, APPROVED BY THE CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD, YOUR BID ON ITEMS NOS. 3, 4 AND 5 WAS REJECTED ON THE BASIS OF THE REPORT OF FEBRUARY 19, 1960, BY THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL REFERRED TO ABOVE. AWARDS WERE MADE TO WHITE PLAINS ELECTRICAL SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., ON ITEM NO. 3 AND TO GEORGE A. ROBINSON AND COMPANY, INC., ON ITEM NO. 4. ITEM NO. 5 WAS CANCELED DUE TO THE UNREASONABLE COST OF AWARDING TO THE THIRD LOW BIDDER.

INVITATION NO. IFB-155-/7-2/-1994-60 WAS ISSUED JANUARY 15, 1960, REQUESTING BIDS ON 30 ITEMS OF WRENCHES AND PLIER CLAMPS. YOU SUBMITTED THE LOW BID OF $1,237.44 LESS A CASH DISCOUNT OF 1 PERCENT 30 DAYS ON ITEM NO. 2. THE SECOND LOW BID ON ITEM NO. 2 WAS SUBMITTED BY SPECIALTIES INCORPORATED, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,314.24 LESS A CASH DISCOUNT OF 2 PERCENT 30 DAYS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, APPROVED BY THE CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD, YOUR BID WAS REJECTED ON THE BASIS OF THE REPORT OF FEBRUARY 19, 1960, BY THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL REFERRED TO ABOVE AND AWARD WAS MADE TO THE SECOND LOW BIDDER ON MARCH 28, 1960.

WITH REFERENCE TO THE OTHER FIVE INVITATIONS LISTED IN YOUR LETTER OF JULY 28, 1960, THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REPORTS THAT YOUR BIDS UNDER INVITATIONS NOS. IFB-155-/7-2/-3521-60 AND IFB-155-/7-5/-3528-60 WERE REJECTED ON THE BASIS OF THE REPORT OF FEBRUARY 19, 1960, BY THE INSPECTOR OF NAVAL MATERIAL REFERRED TO ABOVE. IT IS REPORTED FURTHER THAT AWARDS WERE MADE TO YOU UNDER INVITATIONS NOS. IFB-155-/7-2/-4002 60 AND IFB-155- /3-6/-5073-60, AS STATED ALSO IN YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 24, 1960. IT IS REPORTED ALSO THAT AWARD TO YOU WAS BEING PROCESSED UNDER ITEM NO. 9 OF INVITATION NO. IFB-155-/1-3/-3332-60.

WE HAVE HELD CONSISTENTLY THAT THE QUESTION OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTOR PRIMARILY IS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS CONCERNED AND SUCH DETERMINATION WILL NOT BE QUESTIONED BY US IN THE ABSENCE OF A CLEAR SHOWING OF BAD FAITH OR LACK OF A REASONABLE FACTUAL BASIS THEREFOR. 39 COMP. GEN. 468; 38 ID. 131; ID. 778; 37 ID. 430; ID. 676; 798; 36 ID. 42. IN THE INSTANT MATTER, THE INFORMATION SHOWN IN THE FILE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ACTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS WERE TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH, AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVING THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE GOVERNMENT, AND THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE BASIS FOR SUCH ACTIONS. THEREFORE, THERE APPEARS NO PROPER BASIS FOR OBJECTION BY OUR OFFICE TO THE ACTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IN REJECTING YOUR BIDS.

IN ADDITION TO THE FACT ABOVE STATED THAT THREE AWARDS HAVE BEEN MADE TO YOU UNDER INVITATIONS SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO IN YOUR LETTER OF JULY 28, 1960, THERE IS NOTED THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S STATEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS MATTER THAT RECENTLY IMPROVED DELIVERIES BY YOUR CORPORATION ON CONTRACTS ISSUED IN THE FIRST HALF OF 1960 HAVE BEEN NOTED AND THAT, THEREFORE, YOU ARE CURRENTLY RECEIVING AWARDS UNDER SEVERAL INVITATIONS FOR BIDS.