Marion Composites

B-274621 Dec 20, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Where the solicitation's evaluation scheme provided that the technical evaluation factors were more important than price in determining the proposal representing the best value to the government. Higher-priced proposal for award after reasonably determining that the proposal was technically superior to the protester's and that the advantages of that proposal warranted the payment of a price premium. The basic shelter provides the structural framework for the integrated shelter which will house electronic command. The basic shelter is a six-sided enclosure. Each side of which is made up of aluminum facing panels bonded to a paper honeycomb core. Offerors were also furnished. Technical evaluation factors and performance risk were considered of equal importance. View Decision Matter of: Marion Composites File: B-274621 Date: December 20, 1996 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Marion Composites protests the award of a contract to Gichner Shelter Systems under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAAB07-96-R-E009, issued by the Department of the Army for a quantity of Standardized Integrated Command Post System-Rigid Wall Shelters, Version 4. Marion challenges the evaluation of its proposal and the agency's price/technical tradeoff. We deny the protest. The basic shelter provides the structural framework for the integrated shelter which will house electronic command, control, and communications systems. The basic shelter is a six-sided enclosure, each side of which is made up of aluminum facing panels bonded to a paper honeycomb core. The integrated shelter must contain, at a minimum, workspace for two operators and must support a variety of electronic equipment. The shelter can be set up on the ground or can be mounted on a high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle, transforming the shelter into a mobile command post. The RFP included a Functional Description Document (FUDD) which described the performance specifications for this version of the shelter. Offerors were also furnished, for reference purposes, technical data drawings for the immediately preceding version of the shelter. Offerors could base their shelter design on the data provided or could propose another technical approach for satisfying the FUDD's performance specifications. The RFP contemplated the award of a firm, fixed-price contract for 125 shelters, with an option for up to an additional 400 shelters, to the offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the government, technical evaluation factors, performance risk, price, and management evaluation factors considered. Technical evaluation factors and performance risk were considered of equal importance, and individually were considered more important than price. Price was considered significantly more important than management evaluation factors. [1] As relevant to this protest, the RFP stated that the adequacy of an offeror's technical approach would be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror addressed and understood the design and production requirements. The RFP also stated that the feasibility of an offeror's technical approach would be evaluated to determine whether the offeror's methods and approach in meeting the design and production requirements would provide the government with a high level of confidence of successful completion within the required schedule. Finally, the RFP advised that the award would not necessarily be made to the low-priced offeror. Three firms, including Marion and Gichner, submitted initial technical and price proposals which were included in the competitive range. Following discussions, the agency requested each competitive range offeror to submit a best and final offer (BAFO). The final evaluation ratings for Marion and Gichner were as follows: Marion Gichner Technical Factors Acceptable Outstanding Performance Risk Moderate Low Management Factors Acceptable Good Marion's price was approximately 34 percent less than Gichner's price. Marion, whose predecessor corporate entity developed the current shelter design, proposed to use this design, but to modify several shelter components to reduce costs. For example, Marion proposed an aluminum alloy for the shelter's facing panels which was not as strong as the aluminum alloy currently used. Marion also proposed an unidentified commercial grade paper honeycomb core in lieu of the core material currently used. Marion basically stated that if the proposed alternate materials proved to be unacceptable or unavailable, the firm would revert to using the currently tested and proven component materials at no additional cost to the government.