B-164187, OCT. 25, 1968
Highlights
INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 8. APPARENTLY IN THE BELIEF THAT SUCH ACTION WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND ALSO REFLECTED ADVERSELY ON YOUR FIRM'S CAPABILITY. THAT WHILE IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT AWARD BE MADE TO YOUR FIRM. IT WAS DETERMINED LATER BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE INTERESTS OF THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRED CANCELLATION OF THE RFP BECAUSE OF TECHNICAL DEFECTS IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. ALL OFFERORS UNDER THE RFP WERE ON NOTICE THAT THE GOVERNMENT RESERVED THIS RIGHT IN PARAGRAPH 10 (B) OF THE INSTRUCTIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE RFP. IT IS A GENERAL RULE THAT THE PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY HAS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR DETERMINING WHETHER SPECIFICATIONS ARE TECHNICALLY ADEQUATE FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF THE ITEM BY AN OTHERWISE RESPONSIBLE OFFEROR.
B-164187, OCT. 25, 1968
TO CARTRIDGE ACTUATED DEVICES, INC.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 8, 1968, REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF JULY 31, 1968, B-164187, WHICH DENIED YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE CANCELLATION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. N00419-68-R-0150, ISSUED BY THE NAVAL ORDNANCE STATION,FOREST PARK, ILLINOIS, AND THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO THE CONAX CORPORATION.
IN YOUR LETTER YOU DISAGREE WITH THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER IN CANCELLING RFP -0150, APPARENTLY IN THE BELIEF THAT SUCH ACTION WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND ALSO REFLECTED ADVERSELY ON YOUR FIRM'S CAPABILITY. IT SHOULD BE NOTED, HOWEVER, THAT WHILE IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT AWARD BE MADE TO YOUR FIRM, IT WAS DETERMINED LATER BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE INTERESTS OF THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRED CANCELLATION OF THE RFP BECAUSE OF TECHNICAL DEFECTS IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. ALTHOUGH YOU MAY DISAGREE WITH THE ACTION TAKEN, ALL OFFERORS UNDER THE RFP WERE ON NOTICE THAT THE GOVERNMENT RESERVED THIS RIGHT IN PARAGRAPH 10 (B) OF THE INSTRUCTIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE RFP.
IT IS A GENERAL RULE THAT THE PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY HAS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR DETERMINING WHETHER SPECIFICATIONS ARE TECHNICALLY ADEQUATE FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF THE ITEM BY AN OTHERWISE RESPONSIBLE OFFEROR. FOR GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASONS, THE PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY FOUND THAT THE SPECIFICATIONS WERE SO TECHNICALLY DEFICIENT THAT ONLY THE PRIOR PRODUCER COULD MANUFACTURE THE ITEM TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE USING AGENCY. THERE IS NO REGULATORY REQUIREMENT THAT AN AWARD BE MADE TO AN OFFEROR SOLELY BECAUSE OF A FAVORABLE PREAWARD SURVEY. NEITHER IS THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRED TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO ANY OFFEROR IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT SUCH AWARD MAY PROVE TO BE DISADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT.
WE HAVE NO INFORMATION IN THE RECORD BEFORE US RELATING TO YOUR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT HAD PURCHASED THE DATA PACKAGE FOR THE SUPPLIES INVOLVED AND THE EXTENT TO WHICH IT HAD RIGHTS TO USE SUCH DATA. WE SUGGEST THAT YOU DIRECT YOUR REQUEST TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY WHICH MAY BE IN A POSITION TO ANSWER YOUR INQUIRY.