Skip to main content

B-186041, MAR 26, 1976

B-186041 Mar 26, 1976
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

PROTEST AGAINST PROSPECTIVE AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION OF RESPONSIBILITY ON GROUNDS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO DEFINITIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA CONTAINED IN SOLICITATION WILL NOT BE REVIEWED BY GAO ABSENT ALLEGATION OF FRAUD. INC.: THIS IS A PROTEST FILED BY THE TABET MANUFACTURING COMPANY. TABET'S POSITION CLEARLY ANTICIPATES THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL MAKE AN AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION OF AUDI'S RESPONSIBILITY. ABSENT ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD OR UNLESS THE SOLICITATION INCLUDES DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA WHICH IT IS CLAIMED WERE NOT APPLIED. AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATIONS ARE BASED IN LARGE MEASURE ON SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENTS WHICH ARE LARGELY WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE PROCURING OFFICIALS WHO MUST SUFFER ANY DIFFICULTIES RESULTING BY REASON OF A CONTRACTOR'S INABILITY TO PERFORM.

View Decision

B-186041, MAR 26, 1976

PROTEST AGAINST PROSPECTIVE AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION OF RESPONSIBILITY ON GROUNDS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO DEFINITIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA CONTAINED IN SOLICITATION WILL NOT BE REVIEWED BY GAO ABSENT ALLEGATION OF FRAUD.

TABET MANUFACTURING CO., INC.:

THIS IS A PROTEST FILED BY THE TABET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. (TABET) OBJECTING TO AN AWARD TO AUDI INDUSTRIES (AUDI) UNDER RFQ N00104-76-B- 0483, ISSUED BY THE NAVY SUPPLY SYSTEMS COMMAND. TABET CONTENDS THAT AUDI LACKS THE EXPERTISE AND TOOLING NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT, AND ASSERTS THAT THE TIME WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN SUCH TOOLING "WOULD DRASTICALLY IMPACT (AUDI'S) DELIVERY SCHEDULE." FURTHER, TABET ARGUES THAT AUDI HAS SUBMITTED A BELOW-COST BID, AND SUGGESTS THAT A PRE- AWARD SURVEY SHOULD BE CONDUCTED.

TABET'S POSITION CLEARLY ANTICIPATES THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL MAKE AN AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION OF AUDI'S RESPONSIBILITY. HOWEVER, THIS OFFICE NO LONGER REVIEWS PROTESTS AGAINST AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY, ABSENT ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD OR UNLESS THE SOLICITATION INCLUDES DEFINITIVE RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA WHICH IT IS CLAIMED WERE NOT APPLIED. CENTRAL METAL PRODUCTS, INC., 54 COMP.GEN. 66, 74-2 CPD 64 (1974). WHILE WE DO CONSIDER PROTESTS AGAINST DETERMINATIONS OF NONRESPONSIBILITY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ASSURANCE AGAINST THE ARBITRARY REJECTION OF BIDS, AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATIONS ARE BASED IN LARGE MEASURE ON SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENTS WHICH ARE LARGELY WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE PROCURING OFFICIALS WHO MUST SUFFER ANY DIFFICULTIES RESULTING BY REASON OF A CONTRACTOR'S INABILITY TO PERFORM.

ACCORDINGLY, THIS PROTEST IS DISMISSED.

GAO Contacts

Kenneth E. Patton
Managing Associate General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel

Edward (Ed) Goldstein
Managing Associate General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel

Media Inquiries

Sarah Kaczmarek
Managing Director
Office of Public Affairs

Public Inquiries