About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-183560 1 (1975-10-17)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadcuk0001 and id is 1 raw text is: g P THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL . . OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20548 FILE: B-183560 DATE: October 17,1975 MATTER OF: Unitron Engineering Company DIGEST: 1. Protester was not prohibited from submitting all or none offer as alleged because paragraph 10(c) of Standard Form 33A clearly permits all or none offers. 2. RFP clause providing that Government may evaluate offers on the basis of the relative merits of multiple awards does not preclude all or none offers because the clause merely reserves the right to make multiple awards and does not require them. 3. Protester's contention that award was improper because successful offeror had been dissolved was not considered on the merits because this Office has discontinued review of affirmative determinations of responsibility in absence of fraud. Request for proposals (RFP) No. N00104-75-R-1974 was issued by the Navy Ships Parts Control Center, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, for the procurement of electronic workbench cabinet assemblies, base cabinet assemblies, back panels and shelves, distribution boxes, and auxiliary table assemblies. The procurement was negotiated under the authority of Armed Services Procurement Regulation (ASPR) § 3-201.2(b)(ii)(A) (1974 ed.), as a total small business set-aside. In view of the urgent need for the items, conventional negotiation was used in lieu of Small Business Restricted Advertising. Seventy- three firms were solicited, nine of which responded. Although the protester, Unitron Engineering Co. (Unitron), had submitted the lowest price for Items 0001 and 0005, award was made to Dayton Manufacturing Co. (Dayton), whose all or none offer was at a total price well below the best combination available to the Government through multiple awards. The all or none offer of Dayton was considerably less than the aggregate of the line item prices submitted by Unitron. Unitron maintains that it was not apprised by the solicitation that all or none offers were acceptable. Specifically, Unitron contends that paragraph 10(c) of Standard Form 33A, which was incorpo- rated into the solicitation, is intended to allow a bidder to quote - 1 -

What Is HeinOnline?

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.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most