Skip to Highlights
Highlights

TO SHERER-GILLETT COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 14. THE CONTRACT WAS AWARDED BY THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE. YOU MAKE THE SAME BASIC CONTENTION THAT WAS CONSIDERED THEREIN. THAT IS. YOU CONTEND THAT SSC DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE AWARD BECAUSE IT DID NOT "MANUFACTURE" THE EQUIPMENT LISTED IN ITS BIDS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF THE INVITATION THAT "BIDDERS MUST * * * LIST * * * THREE (3) LOCATIONS WHERE SUCH INSTALLATIONS ARE NOW OPERATING SATISFACTORILY * * *.'. IT IS OUR POSITION THAT THE EQUIPMENT AT THE THREE LOCATIONS CITED BY THE BIDDER DOES NOT NECESSARILY REFER TO EQUIPMENT "MANUFACTURED" BY THE BIDDER. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT IN THE INVITATION OR ELSEWHERE THAT WE ARE AWARE OF WHICH PRECLUDES A BIDDER FROM FURNISHING THE PRODUCT OF ANOTHER COMPANY.

View Decision

B-165527, DEC. 5, 1968

TO SHERER-GILLETT COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 14, 1968, REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF NOVEMBER 12, 1968, IN WHICH WE DENIED YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO SCIENTIFIC SYSTEMS CORPORATION (SSC). THE CONTRACT WAS AWARDED BY THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF ONE PLANT GROWTH CHAMBER AT A PRICE OF $7,150.

IN REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION, YOU MAKE THE SAME BASIC CONTENTION THAT WAS CONSIDERED THEREIN. THAT IS, YOU CONTEND THAT SSC DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE AWARD BECAUSE IT DID NOT "MANUFACTURE" THE EQUIPMENT LISTED IN ITS BIDS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF THE INVITATION THAT "BIDDERS MUST * * * LIST * * * THREE (3) LOCATIONS WHERE SUCH INSTALLATIONS ARE NOW OPERATING SATISFACTORILY * * *.'

AS STATED IN THE DECISION, IT IS OUR POSITION THAT THE EQUIPMENT AT THE THREE LOCATIONS CITED BY THE BIDDER DOES NOT NECESSARILY REFER TO EQUIPMENT "MANUFACTURED" BY THE BIDDER. IT REFERS TO ,THE PRODUCT OF AN ESTABLISHED MANUFACTURER * * *.' THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT IN THE INVITATION OR ELSEWHERE THAT WE ARE AWARE OF WHICH PRECLUDES A BIDDER FROM FURNISHING THE PRODUCT OF ANOTHER COMPANY, SO LONG AS IT IS THE PRODUCT OF A "MANUFACTURER HAVING PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE IN THIS IELD" , AND THE BIDDER HAS INSTALLED THE PRODUCT AT THREE LOCATIONS AND "SUCH INSTALLATIONS ARE NOW OPERATING SATISFACTORILY * * *.' THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE REPORTS THAT SSC HAD INSTALLED THE EQUIPMENT AT TWO OF THE LOCATIONS LISTED IN ITS BID AND HAD EXTENSIVELY MODIFIED THE EQUIPMENT AT THE THIRD LOCATION TO MAKE IT OPERATE PROPERLY. SINCE THE OBJECT OF THE REQUIREMENT IS TO DEMONSTRATE THE BIDDER'S CAPABILITY TO DELIVER AN ACCEPTABLE GROWTH CHAMBER, WE BELIEVE THE EVIDENCE OF SUCH CAPABILITY AS WAS PRESENTED BY SSC SUPPORTS THE AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION MADE BY DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL.

GAO Contacts