B-164473, AUG. 1, 1968
Highlights
THE RECORD FURNISHED BY NASA INDICATES THAT YOUR PROTEST ACTUALLY IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE AWARD MADE UNDER INFORMAL LETTER REQUEST FOR QUOTATION 8040-2041 AND 2042 ISSUED UNDER NASA PROCUREMENT REGULATION 3.600. FOUR QUOTATIONS WERE RECEIVED. THE LOWEST QUOTATION WAS SUBMITTED BY ELECTRA-TRONICS. ELECTRA TRONICS SUBMITTED DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE WHICH WAS REFERRED TO THE REQUISITIONING ACTIVITY FOR TECHNICAL EVALUATION AND DETERMINATION OF ACCEPTABILITY. THE UNITS WERE DELIVERED ON JUNE 5. THE UNITS ARE REPORTED TO BE WORKING SATISFACTORILY. NASA ADVISED OUR OFFICE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED A LESSER PRODUCT THAN THAT SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION WITHOUT ALLOWING ALL OFFERORS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO QUOTE ON AN EQUALLY ACCEPTABLE PRODUCT.
B-164473, AUG. 1, 1968
TO MR. JOHN J. FETCH:
BY TELEGRAM OF MAY 29, 1968, YOU PROTESTED AGAINST THE AWARD UNDER NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA) REQUEST FOR QUOTATION 8040-2041 TO ANY OFFEROR OTHER THAN YOUR COMPANY.
THE RECORD FURNISHED BY NASA INDICATES THAT YOUR PROTEST ACTUALLY IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE AWARD MADE UNDER INFORMAL LETTER REQUEST FOR QUOTATION 8040-2041 AND 2042 ISSUED UNDER NASA PROCUREMENT REGULATION 3.600, ET SEQ., FOR SMALL PURCHASES NOT EXCEEDING $2,500.
THE REQUEST FOR QUOTATION SOLICITED PRICES TO FURNISH TWO GAS CHLORINATORS,"CAPITAL CONTROLS, INC. MODEL 601 ADVANCE," OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS SET FORTH IN THE REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS.
FOUR QUOTATIONS WERE RECEIVED. YOUR COMPANY OFFERED TO FURNISH A MODEL 605 REPRESENTED AS AN IMPROVED MODEL 601 AT A PRICE OF $720 A UNIT. TWO OTHER OFFERORS QUOTED PRICES OF $715 AND $719 A UNIT FOR THE MODEL 601. THE LOWEST QUOTATION WAS SUBMITTED BY ELECTRA-TRONICS, INC., WHICH OFFERED AN ALTERNATE ITEM, A WALLACE AND TIERNAN, INC., MODEL V-50, V-NOTCH CHLORINATOR, AT A PRICE OF $540 PER UNIT. ELECTRA TRONICS SUBMITTED DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE WHICH WAS REFERRED TO THE REQUISITIONING ACTIVITY FOR TECHNICAL EVALUATION AND DETERMINATION OF ACCEPTABILITY. THE TECHNICAL EVALUATOR ADVISED THAT THE CHLORINATOR DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR DIRECT CYLINDER MOUNTING AND OTHER MINOR DIFFERENCES, BUT THAT IT WOULD PROVIDE THE SAME END PRODUCT SERVICE. THE TECHNICAL EVALUATOR RECOMMENDED THE PURCHASE OF THE CHLORINATOR PROPOSED BY ELECTRA TRONICS. ON THE BASIS OF THE EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER PURCHASED THE UNITS OFFERED BY ELECTRA-TRONICS ON MAY 27, 1968. THE UNITS WERE DELIVERED ON JUNE 5, 1968, AND PAID FOR ON JUNE 14, 1968. THE UNITS ARE REPORTED TO BE WORKING SATISFACTORILY.
NASA ADVISED OUR OFFICE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED A LESSER PRODUCT THAN THAT SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION WITHOUT ALLOWING ALL OFFERORS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO QUOTE ON AN EQUALLY ACCEPTABLE PRODUCT. IN B-160602, MARCH 7, 1967, COPY HEREWITH, OUR OFFICE HELD THAT WHERE A PROCUREMENT WAS BEING ACCOMPLISHED UNDER THE SIMPLIFIED SMALL PURCHASE PROCEDURES, AS HERE, SUPPLIERS WHO QUOTED PRICES ON THE PROCUREMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO QUOTE ON LESS EXACTING REQUIREMENTS WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED AS A RESULT OF ONE OF THE QUOTATIONS RECEIVED THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUIREMENTS COULD BE SATISFIED BY EQUIPMENT MEETING LESS EXACTING STANDARDS THAN THOSE UPON WHICH QUOTATIONS HAD BEEN REQUESTED.
HOWEVER, SINCE THE EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED AND PAID FOR, NO FURTHER ACTION IS CONTEMPLATED BY OUR OFFICE WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROCUREMENT. YOUR PROTEST IS THEREFORE DENIED.