Skip to Highlights
Highlights

AUTOMATIC MANUFACTURING DIVISION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM DATED JULY 19. BIDS WERE REQUESTED ON RADIOSONDE SETS WHICH WERE TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH (A) MILITARY SPECIFICATION MIL-R-55065A (SIGC) DATED FEBRUARY 20. WHICH WERE TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE MILITARY SPECIFICATION. - (A) IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT ALL BIDDERS MUST SPECIFY IN THEIR BIDS (1) THE TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF ELECTRON TUBES USED IN THE EQUIPMENT. AMENDMENT NO. 1 WAS ISSUED JUNE 18. NOTE NO. 5 READING AS FOLLOWS: "THE FOLLOWING DESIGNATED ELECTRON TUBES ARE TO BE SUPPLIED: TABLE "/1) TUBE TYPE 3A5 PER MIL-E-1/33B DATED 21 JAN 59 (2) TUBE TYPE 7246 PER MIL-E-1/1300 (SIGC) DATED 10 AUG 59 (3) TUBE TYPE 7533 PER MIL-E-1-1311 (SIGC) DATED 24 SEP 59 W/AMENDMENT 1.

View Decision

B-149484, SEP. 26, 1962

TO GENERAL INSTRUMENT CORPORATION, AUTOMATIC MANUFACTURING DIVISION:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR TELEGRAM DATED JULY 19, 1962, AND LETTER DATED JULY 23, 1962, WITH ENCLOSURES, PROTESTING AWARD TO ANY OTHER BIDDER UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. SC-36-039-62-1968-B4-51, ISSUED BY THE U.S. ARMY SIGNAL SUPPLY AGENCY, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

BIDS WERE REQUESTED ON RADIOSONDE SETS WHICH WERE TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH (A) MILITARY SPECIFICATION MIL-R-55065A (SIGC) DATED FEBRUARY 20, 1962; (B) THE GOVERNMENT FURNISHED MODEL; AND (C) SPECIAL NOTES CONTAINED IN THE INVITATION. EACH SET INCLUDED A T656 RADIOSONDE TRANSMITTER AND AN R610 RADIO RECEIVER, WHICH WERE TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE MILITARY SPECIFICATION.

PROVISION X OF THE INVITATION READS IN PART AS FOLLOWS:

"ELECTRON TUBES SUPPLIED WITH EQUIPMENT.--- (A) IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT ALL BIDDERS MUST SPECIFY IN THEIR BIDS (1) THE TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF ELECTRON TUBES USED IN THE EQUIPMENT, AND (2) IF THE EQUIPMENT CONSISTS OF MORE THAN ONE MAJOR COMPONENT, THE TUBE COMPLEMENT OF EACH COMPONENT.'

HOWEVER, AMENDMENT NO. 1 WAS ISSUED JUNE 18, 1962, WHICH AMENDED THE INVITATION IN CERTAIN RESPECTS, INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF SEVERAL NOTES, NOTE NO. 5 READING AS FOLLOWS:

"THE FOLLOWING DESIGNATED ELECTRON TUBES ARE TO BE SUPPLIED:

TABLE

"/1) TUBE TYPE 3A5 PER MIL-E-1/33B DATED 21 JAN 59

(2) TUBE TYPE 7246 PER MIL-E-1/1300 (SIGC) DATED 10 AUG 59

(3) TUBE TYPE 7533 PER MIL-E-1-1311 (SIGC) DATED 24 SEP 59

W/AMENDMENT 1, DATED 1 FEB 59

(4) TUBE TYPE 5875 PER MIL-E-1/1460 (SIGC) DATED 8 JAN 62"

AMENDMENT NO. 2 WAS ISSUED JUNE 27, 1962, CANCELLING AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND RESTATING ALL PERTINENT CHANGES TO DATE, INCLUDING THE DESIGNATION OF THE ELECTRON TUBES TO BE SUPPLIED, AS LISTED ABOVE.

THERE WERE 16 BIDDERS, ALL OF WHOM AGREED TO AMENDMENTS 1 AND 2, BUT ONLY TWO BIDS, YOUR OWN AND THAT OF MOLDED INSULATION COMPANY, WHICH WAS HIGHER THAN YOUR BID, MADE SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THE TYPES OF ELECTRON TUBES TO BE USED IN THE EQUIPMENT. YOUR BID SPECIFIES THAT ONE EACH OF THE FOUR TUBE TYPES LISTED IN THE ABOVE AMENDMENTS WILL BE USED AND THAT TYPES 5875 AND 7533 WILL BE USED IN THE TRANSMITTER AND TYPES 3A5 AND 7246 IN THE RECEIVER, WHEREAS THE BID OF MOLDED INSULATION COMPANY STATES THAT "ELECTRON TUBES WILL BE AS SPECIFIED IN NOTE 5 OF AMENDMENT NO. "

YOU PROTEST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANY OTHER BIDDER ON THE GROUND THAT BIDS WHICH FAILED TO FURNISH THE INFORMATION REQUIRED BY PROVISION X SHOULD BE CONSIDERED NONRESPONSIVE. IN SUPPORT OF YOUR POSITION YOU REFER TO OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 13, 1961, B-144112, AND CASES CITED THEREIN, AND YOU CONTEND THAT AMENDMENT 2 DID NOT AFFECT PROVISION X, SINCE IT MADE NO REFERENCE THERETO AND DID NOT INDICATE EITHER THE QUANTITY OF TUBES OR THE TUBE COMPLEMENT OF EACH MAJOR COMPONENT.

AS INDICATED IN THE DECISION CITED ABOVE, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MAY NOT WAIVE THE FAILURE OF A BIDDER TO FURNISH INFORMATION WHICH GOES TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE BID AND IS NECESSARY FOR ITS EVALUATION, AND WHICH, IF REQUESTED AFTER BID OPENING, WOULD GIVE THE BIDDER TWO CHANCES AT THE PROCUREMENT, WITH THE OPTION OF EITHER SECURING AN AWARD BY CLARIFICATION OF THE BID OR OF SO ACTING AS TO CAUSE REJECTION OF THE BID IF IMPROVIDENTLY MADE. SUCH IS NOT THE CASE HERE.

THE SETS WERE REQUIRED TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITED MILITARY SPECIFICATION AND THE GOVERNMENT FURNISHED MODEL. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY REPORTS THAT IT CAN BE DETERMINED FROM PARAGRAPH 3.10.3 OF SPECIFICATION MIL-R-55065A THAT THE T-656 TRANSMITTER MUST CONTAIN TWO SEPARATE TUBES; THAT IT CAN BE CONCLUSIVELY ESTABLISHED FROM INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THE INDIVIDUAL TUBE SPECIFICATION SHEETS CITED IN AMENDMENT 2 THAT TYPE 7246 IS USED IN THE RECEIVER AND TYPE 7533 IN THE TRANSMITTER; AND THAT REFERENCE TO THE OFFICIAL PROCUREMENT MODEL WILL SHOW THAT THE SECOND TUBE USED IN THE TRANSMITTER IS TYPE 5875 AND THE OTHER TUBE USED IN THE RECEIVER IS TYPE 3A5.

THE QUESTION FOR DETERMINATION IS WHETHER THE BIDS CAN, IN FACT, BE EVALUATED WITH THE INFORMATION AT HAND, AND IN MAKING THIS DETERMINATION CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO ALL BID PROVISIONS AND ALL REFERENCE MATERIAL. THE ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT 2 MADE IT MANDATORY THAT THE TUBES LISTED IN NOTE 5 BE FURNISHED AND ELIMINATED THE NEED FOR SPECIFYING TUBE TYPES UNDER PROVISION X, AND SINCE REFERENCE TO THE SPECIFICATIONS AND THE PROCUREMENT MODEL ESTABLISHED THAT ONLY ONE OF EACH TYPE WAS INVOLVED AND THE EXACT LOCATION OF EACH TUBE, THERE WAS NO NEED TO SPECIFY QUANTITY OR TUBE COMPLEMENT. EVEN THE LONE ADDITIONAL BIDDER WHO INSERTED INFORMATION UNDER PROVISION X MERELY STATED THAT THE TUBES WOULD BE AS SPECIFIED IN NOTE 5 OF THE AMENDMENT. IT IS CLEAR, THEREFORE, THAT THE OTHER 15 BIDDERS CONSIDERED, AND JUSTIFIABLY SO, THAT THE ISSUANCE OF THE AMENDMENT ELIMINATED THE NEED FOR FURTHER IDENTIFICATION OF TUBE COMPLEMENT, AND BY AGREEING TO AMENDMENT 2 ALL BIDDERS OBLIGATED THEMSELVES TO FURNISH SPECIFICATION MATERIAL, WITH NO FURTHER CHOICE IN THE MATTER OF TUBES AND NO NEED FOR CLARIFICATION OF WHAT WAS BEING OFFERED.

FOR THE REASONS STATED, WE CONCLUDE THAT THE FAILURE TO INSERT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED UNDER PROVISION X DID NOT RENDER A BID NONRESPONSIVE AND YOUR PROTEST MUST THEREFORE BE DENIED.

GAO Contacts