LaBarge Electronics

B-266210 Feb 09, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Where the agency received only two offers and the protester's proposed price was determined to be unreasonable. Telex and LaBarge have previously supplied audio cassette machines for this program under separate contracts with the Library. Were subject to different performance specifications. Detailed specifications for the audio cassette machines (NLS Specification 101-3) were set forth in the RFP and provided mandatory design. Were identified but not required. [1] Offerors were informed that proposals of machines that were determined to be compliant with the "mandatory requirements of NLS Specification 101-3" [emphasis in original] would be evaluated under the following technical evaluation factors. View Decision Matter of: LaBarge Electronics File: B-266210 Date: February 9, 1996 In a negotiated procurement for audio cassette machines, the procuring agency properly determined to make a single award under a solicitation that permitted up to two awards, where the agency received only two offers and the protester's proposed price was determined to be unreasonable. Attorneys DECISION LaBarge Electronics protests the award of a contract to Telex Communications, Inc., under request for proposals (RFP) No. RFP95-3, issued by the Library of Congress, for audio cassette machines for the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (NLS). LaBarge contends that the agency unreasonably made a single award where the solicitation provided for multiple awards. We deny the protest. The NLS administers a government program that provides books and magazines on audio cassettes and audio cassette machines to eligible blind and physically handicapped persons. Telex and LaBarge have previously supplied audio cassette machines for this program under separate contracts with the Library. Telex, the original supplier of the audio cassettes machines, provided its C-1 model machine, while LaBarge supplied the C-2 model. The two audio cassette models, while essentially functionally equivalent, were subject to different performance specifications, reflecting differences in design, method of manufacture, and warranty periods. The RFP, as initially issued, contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract for an estimated quantity of 63,000 audio cassette machines in each of the base and three option periods. Detailed specifications for the audio cassette machines (NLS Specification 101-3) were set forth in the RFP and provided mandatory design, performance, test, and warranty requirements; other optional features, such as a battery charging feature, were identified but not required. [1] Offerors were informed that proposals of machines that were determined to be compliant with the "mandatory requirements of NLS Specification 101-3" [emphasis in original] would be evaluated under the following technical evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance: Factor 1. Engineering capabilities, including adequacy and currency of. Factor 2. Quality control capability and procedures, including adequacy and currency of. Factor 3. Experience and past performance. Factor 4. Production and warranty repair capability and capacity. Factor 5. Plant facilities and equipment. Offerors were also informed that the reasonableness of their proposed "cost" would be evaluated; in this regard, offerors were required to provide cost breakdown for their proposed pricing. The RFP provided that technical merit was more important than price. The RFP provided for award on a best value basis and informed offerors that the Library reserved the right to make two separate contract awards, for 60 percent of the estimated quantity and for the remaining 40 percent, if two awards were determined to be in the Library's best interest. The higher quantity award would be made to the offeror whose combination of technical and price proposals has the highest overall rankings and which represents the best value to the government price and other factors considered. In addition, the RFP stated that no more than two awards would be made and that the Library reserved the right to make award of the entire quantity to a single offeror whose proposal was considered acceptable and is responsible, if no other offers were determined to be acceptable, price and other factors considered. Initial proposals were received from Telex and LaBarge and evaluated as follows: Technical Score Total Price (of 75 pts. max.) Telex 68 $51,488,010 LaBarge 44 $58,430,290 Because the offerors' proposed prices far exceeded the Library's estimated price, the agency decided to reduce the contract requirements.