Better Service

B-265751.2 Jan 18, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Protest against agency's bundling of copier machine service for government-owned machines with sales of copiers under a federal supply schedule solicitation is sustained where the agency has not shown that the bundling is necessary for it to meet its minimum needs. Protest against agency's deletion of a clause requiring manufacturers awarded a federal supply schedule (FSS) contract to sell spare parts to service vendors under the FSS is denied. Agency is not required to compel copier machine vendors to sell parts to service vendors. BUNDLING OF SALES AND SERVICE At issue in this case are two solicitation provisions that Better Service maintains are unduly restrictive of competition. Firms are essentially required to offer sales and service as a total package. View Decision Matter of: Better Service File: B-265751.2 Date: January 18, 1996 Protest against agency's bundling of copier machine service for government-owned machines with sales of copiers under a federal supply schedule solicitation is sustained where the agency has not shown that the bundling is necessary for it to meet its minimum needs. Protest against agency's deletion of a clause requiring manufacturers awarded a federal supply schedule (FSS) contract to sell spare parts to service vendors under the FSS is denied; agency is not required to compel copier machine vendors to sell parts to service vendors. Attorneys DECISION Better Service protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. FCGR-92-0041-N, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) to allow an open season for adding vendors to its multiple award federal supply schedule (FSS) for the purchase, rental, maintenance, repair and lease-to-purchase of photocopiers, supplies and accessories. Better Service argues that the solicitation improperly requires firms to offer photocopier sales in connection with an offer to provide maintenance and repair service for government-owned equipment. Better Service also contends that GSA improperly deleted a solicitation provision requiring manufacturers of photocopier equipment receiving award of an FSS contract to make spare parts available at reasonable prices to FSS vendors providing maintenance and repair services. We sustain the protest in part and deny it in part. BUNDLING OF SALES AND SERVICE At issue in this case are two solicitation provisions that Better Service maintains are unduly restrictive of competition. The first provision requires firms offering repair and maintenance services for government-owned equipment to also offer copier machines for sale; firms are essentially required to offer sales and service as a total package, and are thus precluded from offering only repair and maintenance service. Because procurements conducted on a bundled or total package basis can unduly restrict competition, we will sustain a challenge to the use of such an approach where it is not necessary to satisfy the agency's minimum needs. National Customer Eng'g, 72 Comp.Gen. 132 (1993), 93-1 CPD Para. 225. GSA does not dispute that its bundling approach reduces competition and, specifically, precludes the protester and similarly situated firms from competing. It contends only that applicable regulations require multiple award schedule contracts to be national in scope and that such contracts are more efficient for user agencies and permit GSA to negotiate more favorable prices initially. The record does not show, however, and it is not apparent to us, how separating the sales requirement from the service requirement would inhibit GSA's ability to negotiate favorable contracts for repair and maintenance on a national basis. It would seem that the only direct result of separating the requirements would be to have two, instead of one, national scope acquisitions. Better Service states that it is fully prepared to offer national coverage for repair and maintenance. GSA contends that separating these two requirements will increase the number of offers to be evaluated and the number of contracts to be administered, thus resulting in a significant duplication of effort. GSA's contention in this regard, however, does not justify bundling the two requirements. First, GSA has presented no evidence showing that any expected additional contracts would involve significant additional cost to the government. See Richard M. Milburn High Sch., B-244933, Nov. 27, 1991, 91-2 CPD Para. 496. Further, the fact that bundling will be more administratively convenient is insufficient to support this inherently restrictive approach. Id. When concerns of administrative convenience are being weighed against ensuring full and open competition, the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA), 41 U.S.C. Sec. 253 et seq. (1994), and its implementing regulations require that the scales be tipped in favor of ensuring full and open competition.