G. H. Harlow Company, Inc.

B-266049 Jan 26, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Protest that salient characteristic for a fire-detection system solicited on a brand name or equal basis is unduly restrictive of competition is denied where the contracting agency reasonably determined that the requirement is a necessary safety feature. Are unduly restrictive of competition. The system operator in the central base station is able to identify the location of the fire. Systems of this type include a means of verifying that the remote transceivers are functioning properly. If the transceiver is operating abnormally in any way. The abnormal condition would automatically be reported in a display at the central base station when the test interrogation is initiated. The IFB specifies that remote radio transceivers include a radio receiver and transmitter to allow an interrogation/reply technique in which the transceivers are interrogated at regular intervals automatically. View Decision Matter of: G. H. Harlow Company, Inc. File: B-266049 Date: January 26, 1996 Protest that salient characteristic for a fire-detection system solicited on a brand name or equal basis is unduly restrictive of competition is denied where the contracting agency reasonably determined that the requirement is a necessary safety feature. Attorneys DECISION G. H. Harlow Company, Inc. protests that certain specifications included in invitation for bids (IFB) No. DAHA30-95-B-0006, issued by the Departments of the Army and the Air Force, National Guard Bureau, for a fire-detection system, are unduly restrictive of competition. In particular, Harlow challenges the method specified for manually checking the integrity of the system's remote transceivers. We deny the protest. The IFB seeks bids for construction of a base-wide fire-detection system for the Air National Guard Base in Westhampton Beach, New York, including a supplementary water supply connection and fire alarm detection systems in various buildings. The portion of the solicitation at issue here involves the installation of a radio-type fire reporting system. The IFB, as amended, requires the contractor to supply and install Monaco Enterprises, Inc.'s model D-700 or equal. The IFB describes the salient characteristics of the brand-name system and lists the installation and operational standards that must be met. The type of fire-detection system being procured consists of a central base station and numerous transceivers located throughout the installation. In the event of a fire, the transceivers transmit signals to the base station; based on those signals, the system operator in the central base station is able to identify the location of the fire. Systems of this type include a means of verifying that the remote transceivers are functioning properly. In this case, the IFB specifies that radio transceivers in the various remote locations must respond to test interrogations from the central base station, indicating the operational status of the transceiver. Thus, if the transceiver is operating abnormally in any way, for example because of a power failure, a low battery, or tampering, the abnormal condition would automatically be reported in a display at the central base station when the test interrogation is initiated. The IFB specifies that remote radio transceivers include a radio receiver and transmitter to allow an interrogation/reply technique in which the transceivers are interrogated at regular intervals automatically, and that the system also be capable of being tested manually from the central base station radio equipment with replies returned by the remote transceivers indicating transceiver status. Harlow argues this "two-way" system, which Harlow complains is unique to Monaco's equipment, is not the only means available to manually test transceiver integrity, and that the specified system exceeds the agency's actual needs. Harlow points out that either system permits manual operation, and argues that since the only difference between a one-way and a two-way system when operated manually is the location from which the test signal is initiated, the two-way system does not provide any higher level of safety or service. The protester contends that reliance on a manual test signal initiated from the remote transmitters as opposed to from the base receiver is allowed by the standards of the National Fire Protection Association, which is cited in the IFB as applicable. In response, the agency states that it has determined that its protection and safety needs dictate a system that permits manually initiating test procedures to verify system integrity and operation from the base station.