B-157653, DEC. 2, 1965
Highlights
INCORPORATED: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 9. YOUR COMPANY WAS AWARDED THE CONTRACT FOR THE REPAIRS DESCRIBED IN THE FIRST PROPOSAL REQUEST. WAS AWARDED TO THE ARNOLD COMPANY. IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOUR CONTRACT SHOULD HAVE COVERED ALL OF THE REPAIR WORK REQUIRED DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1966. THE PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD BELIEVED THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPROPER TO MAKE AN AWARD TO YOUR COMPANY FOR THE REPAIR OF ALL MOTORS RANGING FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER. HAS CONCLUDED THAT YOUR PROPOSAL TO PERFORM SERVICES ON ALL MOTORS FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER COULD HAVE BEEN AND MAY NOW BE ACCEPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT. SINCE THE PURPOSE OF YOUR PROTEST TO OUR OFFICE IN THE MATTER APPARENTLY WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED AT AN EARLY DATE.
B-157653, DEC. 2, 1965
TO PENN ELECTRIC MOTOR COMPANY, INCORPORATED:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 1965, PROTESTING THE AWARD OF NAVY CONTRACT NO. NBY-65302 BY THE PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD TO THE ARNOLD COMPANY, INCORPORATED, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.
THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON APRIL 14, 1965, THE PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD ISSUED TWO REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS FOR REPAIR OF ELECTRIC MOTORS AS REQUIRED AND ORDERED BY THE SHIPYARD DURING THE PERIOD JULY 1, 1965, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1966. YOUR COMPANY WAS AWARDED THE CONTRACT FOR THE REPAIRS DESCRIBED IN THE FIRST PROPOSAL REQUEST, IDENTIFIED AS CONTRACT NO. NBY-65301. THAT CONTRACT CALLS FOR THE REPAIR OF MOTORS FROM 10 TO 200 HORSEPOWER. CONTRACT NO. NBY-65302, WHICH CALLS FOR THE REPAIR OF MOTORS FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER, WAS AWARDED TO THE ARNOLD COMPANY, INCORPORATED, THE ONLY COMPANY WHICH SUBMITTED AN OFFER UNDER THE SECOND PROPOSAL REQUEST. IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOUR CONTRACT SHOULD HAVE COVERED ALL OF THE REPAIR WORK REQUIRED DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1966, SINCE YOU HAD OFFERED THE LOWEST PRICES FOR THE REPAIR OF MOTORS FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER WHEN RESPONDING TO THE FIRST PROPOSAL REQUEST.
THE RECORD INDICATES THAT YOUR COMPANY DID NOT RECEIVE A COPY OF THE SECOND PROPOSAL REQUEST AND ASSUMED THAT THE NAVY HAD MADE A MISTAKE IN DESCRIBING ITS REQUIREMENTS. YOU THEREFORE STATED IN YOUR PROPOSAL UNDER THE FIRST PROPOSAL REQUEST THAT "THIS PROPOSAL APPLIES ON ALL MOTORS FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 H.P. IN ALL RATINGS AND MANUFACTURE.' SINCE THE PROPOSED CONTRACT NO. NBY-65301 SPECIFICALLY COVERED ONLY MOTORS FROM 10 TO 200 HORSEPOWER, THE PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD BELIEVED THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPROPER TO MAKE AN AWARD TO YOUR COMPANY FOR THE REPAIR OF ALL MOTORS RANGING FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER, ALTHOUGH YOU HAD AGREED TO PERFORM ALL OF SUCH REPAIR WORK WHEN SUBMITTING AN OFFER UNDER THE FIRST PROPOSAL REQUEST.
UPON ITS REVIEW OF THE MATTER, THE BUREAU OF YARDS AND DOCKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, HAS CONCLUDED THAT YOUR PROPOSAL TO PERFORM SERVICES ON ALL MOTORS FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER COULD HAVE BEEN AND MAY NOW BE ACCEPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT. THE BUREAU HAS, ACCORDINGLY, EVIDENCED AN INTENTION TO INCREASE THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT WITH YOUR FIRM TO INCLUDE ALL MOTORS FROM FRACTIONAL TO 200 HORSEPOWER.
SINCE THE PURPOSE OF YOUR PROTEST TO OUR OFFICE IN THE MATTER APPARENTLY WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED AT AN EARLY DATE, WE ARE CONSIDERING THE CASE CLOSED.