INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO A COPY RECEIVED HERE OF YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 9. THE BASIS FOR THE PROTEST IS THAT YOUR COMPANY OFFERED A BETTER PRICE ON A PRODUCT WHICH ALLEGEDLY IS EQUAL. TO THE ITEM WHICH WAS REQUIRED BY THE REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HAS REPORTED THAT HE DETERMINED TO PROCURE THE JOHN FLUKE 80D30 VOLTAGE DIVIDER ON A SOLE-SOURCE BASIS BECAUSE NO OTHER COMMERCIAL EQUIVALENTS WERE KNOWN TO THE AVIATION SUPPLY OFFICE OR TO THE BUREAU OF NAVAL WEAPONS AND THERE WAS NO ADEQUATE DATA AVAILABLE TO SOLICIT BIDS ON A BROADER SCALE. IT IS REPORTED FURTHER THAT WHEN UNSOLICITED QUOTATIONS WERE RECEIVED FROM YOUR COMPANY AND ANOTHER ONE OFFERING EQUIPMENT OF PERSONAL MANUFACTURE AT PRICES LOWER THAN THE JOHN FLUKE QUOTATION.
B-155774, JAN. 29, 1965
TO MR. LLOYD SILVERMAN, VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL RESISTANCE, INC.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO A COPY RECEIVED HERE OF YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 9, 1964, TO THE UNITED STATES NAVY AVIATION SUPPLY OFFICE, PROTESTING THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO JOHN FLUKE MFG. CO., C., UNDER REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS PGB 4-4.
THE BASIS FOR THE PROTEST IS THAT YOUR COMPANY OFFERED A BETTER PRICE ON A PRODUCT WHICH ALLEGEDLY IS EQUAL, IF NOT SUPERIOR, TO THE ITEM WHICH WAS REQUIRED BY THE REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS.
THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HAS REPORTED THAT HE DETERMINED TO PROCURE THE JOHN FLUKE 80D30 VOLTAGE DIVIDER ON A SOLE-SOURCE BASIS BECAUSE NO OTHER COMMERCIAL EQUIVALENTS WERE KNOWN TO THE AVIATION SUPPLY OFFICE OR TO THE BUREAU OF NAVAL WEAPONS AND THERE WAS NO ADEQUATE DATA AVAILABLE TO SOLICIT BIDS ON A BROADER SCALE. IT IS REPORTED FURTHER THAT WHEN UNSOLICITED QUOTATIONS WERE RECEIVED FROM YOUR COMPANY AND ANOTHER ONE OFFERING EQUIPMENT OF PERSONAL MANUFACTURE AT PRICES LOWER THAN THE JOHN FLUKE QUOTATION, THEY WERE REFERRED TO COGNIZANT TECHNICAL PERSONNEL WHO ADVISED THAT THERE WAS NO WAY TO EVALUATE THE EQUIPMENT OFFERED SINCE TECHNICAL DATA ON THE JOHN FLUKE EQUIPMENT WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE TECHNICAL PERSONNEL ADVISED FURTHER THAT ANY ATTEMPT TO DETERMINE THE ADEQUACY OF THE OFFERED EQUIPMENT BY SOME SORT OF TESTING PROGRAM WOULD TAKE PERHAPS AS MUCH AS SIX MONTHS WITH NO ASSURANCE THAT THE RESULTS WOULD BE CONCLUSIVE AS TO THE ADEQUACY OF THE EQUIPMENT. THEREFORE, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER REJECTED THE LOWER QUOTATIONS AND ACCEPTED THE JOHN FLUKE QUOTATION.
SOLE-SOURCE PROCUREMENTS ARE CONSUMMATED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF 10 U.S.C. 2304 (A) (10). DETERMINATIONS SUPPORTING NEGOTIATION UNDER THAT PROVISION ARE MADE FINAL BY 10 U.S.C. 2310 (B) (SUPP. IV). ACCORDINGLY, WE MUST CONCLUDE THAT THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT IS NOT SUBJECT TO QUESTION BY OUR OFFICE. HOWEVER, WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT THE AVIATION SUPPLY OFFICE INTENDS TO INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING THE BUREAU OF NAVAL WEAPONS SET UP A PROJECT FOR TESTING SO THAT IN THE FUTURE EQUIPMENT OTHER THAN JOHN FLUKE EQUIPMENT MAY QUALIFY FOR AWARD.