Engineering RFP / specs.: Restricting country of origin.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the legality and appropriateness of including clauses in engineering RFPs that restrict the country of origin for materials, specifically excluding those from China, Taiwan, or India. Concerns are raised about the quality assurance implications of sourcing from these regions, particularly regarding ISO 9001 certification and the potential for falsified records. The legality of such restrictions varies, especially for government contracts, where strict regulations may classify geographic exclusions as bid rigging. Private companies have more flexibility in their bidding processes but must still navigate potential legal challenges. Ultimately, the inclusion of these clauses often reflects client requirements and past experiences with quality issues.
rollingstein
Messages
644
Reaction score
16
I was reading a Utility Guidelines document (Yale, for internal systems, but publically available) and came across an interesting clause:

No piping, fittings, or specialties manufactured, fabricated, and/or assembled in China, Taiwan, or India are permitted on any project including those companies registered with ISO 9001. (google this bit if you want to access the full document)

Now, I can see where this might come from. Perhaps, the design engineer got burnt in the past etc.

My question: As a design engineer, am I allowed to, in general, put such clauses (restricting country of origin) in my specs. or RFP's etc.? Asides of political correctness, will this be ok legally?

What about those engineers working in government settings? Does this pass?

Just curious about opinions.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
These clauses are sometimes required by the owner (your customer if you're the design engineer), they are required to do this by their contracts with various unions.

I don't see the design engineer coming up with such restrictions on your own. If you write the spec correctly then any supplier that meets the spec should be OK. That's the reason for writing specs in the first place.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
The reason for this spec is quality assurance, I doubt it has anything to do with unions (though, it's a fair point, and it's something all engineers writing spec's should consider). That's why it talks about ISO 9001 which is the certification for quality management systems. Eastern Asian countries are notorious for fabricating and casting products with limited to no quality management (meaning limited/no tracking, cert's, quality tests, etc). Maybe it would be more fair to say that many contractors decide to purchase materials from companies in that part of the world that provide inexpensive products at the expense of eliminating quality control. There's also been quite a lot of trouble with falsified records and certifications even from manufacturers which were ISO 9001 certified (since certification is done not by ISO, but by third party representatives). Some Owners just decide to nip that in the bud from the beginning and stipulate that materials shall not come from that part of the world.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Ok. Thanks.

I was only wondering if there might be any legal challanges to this. e.g. Could I (very hypothetically) put in a RFP "Contractors from New Jersey need not apply" :)

As a private business in the US I suppose one has a lot of leeway about who and how one chooses to do business with.

Wonder if there are any Government contracts personnel on the forum. They might be bound by stricter rules as to how they can discriminate.
 
That depends on who the client is. I'm not well versed in these types of local exclusions, nor am I a corporate lawyer, so please don't take my advice as the Word. It really depends though, many government contracts work off some version of "full and open competition" and restricting the bidders list by geography might be considered bid rigging. But again, that's mostly for federally funded, or overseen, projects (union contracts may stipulate this as well). I do not know the regulations (if they exist) for private companies wishing to restrict their bidders list, after all, private companies can sole source if they so-choose, and very often use other bids as check-bids while they have already begun discussions with the company of their choice (which in most regulations would be considered bid rigging).

Generally I've just seen this handled by stipulating internally that bids from NJ will be rejected, whether or not they are cheaper in their proposal. Though this sometimes get's the pencil pushers upset, so I could see why you'd want to nip that in the bud right off the bat.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top