HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaacpf0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCUMENT RESUME
03239 - rA2293420]
rReview of Navy Contracting Procedures and Decision to Overhaul
Ship Equipment Using Contractor Rather than Naval Shipyard
Employees]. PSAD-77-149; PSAD-77150; B-146889. August 11, 1977.
4 pp. + enclosure (9 pp.).
Report to Rep. Morris K.. Udall; Sen. Renry M. Jackson; Sen.
Warren G. Magnuson; Rep. Norman D. Dicks; Ly Elmer B. Staats,
Comptrcller General.
Issue Area: Federal Procurement of Goods and Services: OMB
Guidelines for Relying on the Private Sector to Supply
Federal Needs (1906).
Contact: Procurem:-t and Systems Acquisition Div.
Budget Function: National Defense: Depar'tment of Defense -
Procurement & Contracts (058).
Organization Concerned: Department of the Navy: Naval Sea
Systems Command; Department of the Navy: Puget Sound Naval
ShipVard, WA; Hughes Aircraft ro.
Congressional Relevance: House Committee on Armed Services;
Senate Commi+tee on Armed Services. Rep. Morris K. Udall;
Rep. Norman b. Dicks; Sem. Henry N. Jackson; Sen. Warrea G.
Magnuson.
A re.ieN of a Navy contract award to Hughes Aircraft
Comi)anv to repair equipment aboard the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk was
b3sed on informetion which indicated that the award of the
contract to Hufhes would result in a higher cost to the
Government than if Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Naval Sea System
Command, did the work. Findings/Conclusions: The Naval Sea
Systems Command determined that Hughes was the only source
capable of doing the work without making a detailed analysis of
the Shipyard's capabilities or soliciting offers from other
commercial sources. Navy officials stated that detailed
specifications were not available for use by other commercial
sources because the Navy's drawings and data package had not
been kept up to date. GAO believed that Sea Systems had
sufficient time before the award to evaluate the Shipyard'.
capability to ao the work and to take action necessary to
develop any additional capability needed. Since cost estimates
had not been preparee', GAO could not determine what the cost of
the work would have been, but it was believed that the
unofficial estimate was understated. rt was believel that Sea
Systems should have evaluated relative costs before, rather than
after, contracting with lughes and that other sources shoull
have been solicited. Recommendations: The Secretary of the Navy
should: reassess the Sea Systems' plan for futura overhauls to
better determine the Navy's minimum needs for in-house
maintenance capability; update the tactical data system
equipment design packages and drawings; and solicit competition
to the maximum practicable extent. (Author/HTW)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaacpf0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)