B-157217: Oct 11, 1965

TO INSTRUMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 3. YOUR LETTER QUESTIONS THE PROPRIETY OF THE AWARD BECAUSE ASTRONAUTICS CORPORATION DID NOT HAVE IN BEING OPERATING AND QUALIFIED FIRMS WHICH WERE CAPABLE OF PERFORMING IN THE LABOR SURPLUS AREA AND COULD NOT SUBCONTRACT 50 PERCENT OF THE CONTRACT PRICE TO HURLEY. YOU ALSO RAISE THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER...

B-157217: Jun 15, 1966

TO INSTRUMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION: WE HAVE YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 1. YOU THEREFORE CONCLUDE THAT ASTRONAUTICS IS STILL TECHNICALLY IN VIOLATION OF ITS SET-ASIDE CONTRACT. NO ACTION WITH RESPECT THERETO WILL BE TAKEN BY OUR OFFICE. YOUR COMPLAINT HAS REFERENCE TO THE MANNER IN WHICH ASTRONAUTICS IS PERFORMING ITS CONTRACT. WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO OVERSEE THE PERFORMANCE OF GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS. THE CO...

B-157217: May 19, 1966

TO INSTRUMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 12. WE RESPONDED TO YOUR PROTEST IN CONNECTION WITH THE ABOVE INVITATION FOR BIDS AND ADVISED YOU THEREIN THAT THE AWARD OF THE SET-ASIDE PORTION OF THE PROCUREMENT TO THE ASTRONAUTICS CORPORATION OF AMERICA WAS MADE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE INVITATION FOR BIDS AND THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. IN THE DECISION WE STAT...

B-157217: Dec 10, 1965

TO INSTRUMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 3. YOU STATE THAT IT IS YOUR BELIEF THAT ASTRONAUTICS CORPORATION OF AMERICA WAS NOT A LABOR SURPLUS AREA CONCERN WHEN THE PERTINENT INVITATION WAS EXECUTED BY THAT BIDDER AND THAT IT DID NOT IN FACT HAVE AVAILABLE A FACILITY IN HURLEY. AS WAS REPRESENTED IN ITS BID. WE STATED IN OUR DECISION THAT DEFENSE MANPOWER P...