Lewis Machine & Tool Co.

Case: B-272069 Agency: Protester: Lewis Machine & Tool Co. Date: 1996-09-06 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-272069 Sep 06, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Could not be accepted because the subcontract was not authorized by 10 U.S.C. All offerors whose howitzers passed the initial screening were awarded firm. The "shoot-off" is a 6-month long period of developmental tests and operational assessments at several Army and Marine Corps sites. " each offeror is responsible for training agency personnel in the operation and maintenance of its howitzer. Offerors are also responsible for providing technical support and engineering. The Army will use the results of the "shoot-off" together with the evaluations of proposals submitted by the competitors to select a contractor for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of the project. View Decision Matter of: Lewis Machine & Tool Co. File: B-272069 Date: September 6, 1996 Under a solicitation for a prototype lightweight howitzer, the protester's proposal, premised on a prototype developed and fabricated by an Army arsenal and provided under a subcontract to the protester, could not be accepted because the subcontract was not authorized by 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2208(j), which permits subcontracting by arsenals only where they can compete directly under the solicitation with private firms, which this solicitation did not permit. Attorneys DECISION Lewis Machine & Tool Co. protests the decision by the Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, to eliminate Lewis from the competition under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAAE30-96-R-0003 for a contract to participate in the "shoot-off" phase of the development of a lightweight 155 millimeter (mm) howitzer. This RFP contemplated the award of fixed-priced contracts to all acceptable offerors for the "shoot-off," the first phase in the acquisition of a lightweight 155 mm howitzer to replace aging and heavier howitzers currently in use by the Army and Marine Corps. We deny the protest. The RFP required offerors to deliver a single prototype howitzer, as well as related equipment, technical and other specified documentation, and a support team, to Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona by April 25, 1996. Agency personnel then performed an initial screening of the proposed howitzers for compliance with the criteria listed in the RFP and reviewed the acceptability of the submitted technical and other specified documentation. All offerors whose howitzers passed the initial screening were awarded firm, fixed-price contracts in the amount of $500,000 to participate in the "shoot-off" between the competing prototype howitzers. The "shoot-off" is a 6-month long period of developmental tests and operational assessments at several Army and Marine Corps sites, during which agency personnel test, evaluate, and compare the features and attributes of the howitzers which passed the initial screening. During the "shoot-off," each offeror is responsible for training agency personnel in the operation and maintenance of its howitzer, and for responding to government technical inquiries. Offerors are also responsible for providing technical support and engineering, spare parts, and maintenance, and for shipping the howitzers from test site to test site. For the next phase of this procurement, the Army will use the results of the "shoot-off" together with the evaluations of proposals submitted by the competitors to select a contractor for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of the project. The EMD contractor is to supply eight test article howitzers, based on the successful prototype used at the "shoot-off," at specified intervals for further tests to validate engineering changes and manufacturing technologies. The EMD contract will also contain options for subsequent large-scale production of the howitzer. The Arsenal Statute, 10 U.S.C. Sec. 4532 (1994), requires the Army to make its supplies in government-owned factories or arsenals if economical. See Action Mfg, Co., B-220013, Nov. 12, 1985, 85-2 CPD para. 537; B-143232, Dec. 15, 1960. Under current Army procedures, the Army determines prior to issuing a solicitation whether it is more economical to "make" the needed item utilizing in-house manufacturing capacity or to "buy" the item from private industry. [1] Here, the solicitation contemplated the purchase of the howitzer from private industry, which has produced prototypes based on previous development efforts, and did not contemplate that arsenals could compete with private firms for the contracts; none of the standard provisions announcing that arsenals could compete as a prime contractor were included in the RFP. In this regard, where the Army makes a "buy" determination, the Army procedures generally preclude Army industrial facilities, such as arsenals, from competing with private industry under the resulting solicitation.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...