Ericsson, Inc.

Ericsson, Inc. BNUMBER: B-274668; B-274668.2 DATE: December 23, 1996 TITLE: Ericsson, Inc. ********************************************************************** DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE A protected decision was issued on the date below and was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been redacted or approved by the parties involved for public release. Matter of:Ericsson, Inc. File: B-274668; B-274668.2 Date:December 23, 1996 John S. Pachter, Esq., Jonathan D. Shaffer, Esq., and Christina M. Pirrello, Esq., Smith, Pachter, McWhorter, & D'Ambrosio, for the protester. David B. Apatoff, Esq., Arnold & Porter, for Motorola, Inc., an intervenor. Maj. Michael J. O'Farrell, Jr., Department of the Army, for the agency. David A. Ashen, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest against rejection of proposal as unacceptable is denied where agency reasonably determined that proposed digital commercial land mobile radio system did not comply with mandatory solicitation requirements for handheld radios to operate at a UHF frequency range of 403-470 MHz and for the digital interface unit to store up to eight encryption keys; protester's interpretation of specifications as permitting gaps in the required frequency range and only requiring that the interface unit be capable of future upgrade to an eight encryption key storage capacity was unreasonable. DECISION Ericsson, Inc. protests the Department of the Army's award of a contract to Motorola, Inc., under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAJB03-96-R-0036, for replacement of the radio network currently used by the Eighth United States Army, Eighth Military Police Brigade (8th MP). Ericsson argues that the Army improperly rejected its lower-priced proposal as technically unacceptable. We deny the protest. The solicitation contemplated award--to the low, technically acceptable offeror--of a fixed-price contract to provide a new digital commercial land mobile radio system (CLMRS) that would be compliant with frequency changes mandated by the Republic of Korea effective January 1, 1997. The solicitation generally provided that the 8th MP "requires a handheld radio network with repeater system capable of operating in the analog, digital unencrypted and digital encrypted modes" and consisting of handheld radios, repeaters, dispatcher control consoles, digital interface units, and base stations. In addition, Attachment C to the solicitation included a detailed checklist of requirements for each component; the RFP (as amended) stated that technical acceptability would be determined on the basis of "Attachment C only." Offerors were required to furnish "written documentation that substantiates their equipment's ability to meet the salient characteristics identified in this solicitation." Three proposals were received by the closing time on July 26, 1996. Since none of the proposals was considered technically acceptable as submitted, the agency entered into written discussions with each offeror, requesting additional information showing conformance of the proposed system to specified Attachment C requirements. After concluding that Ericsson's response still did not establish conformance with these requirements, the agency first generally requested the protester "to requote an alternate unit meeting all solicitation criteria" and "provide proof of meeting each listed area in which you did not receive a technical 'go,'" and then in a subsequent telephone call raised several specific areas of concern. After receiving another submission from Ericsson, the Army requested best and final offers (BAFO) from all offerors. The agency determined that Ericsson's proposal was technically unacceptable due to noncompliance with Attachment C requirements, and ultimately made award to Motorola based on its finding that only Motorola's BAFO complied with all of the Attachment C requirements. The procuring agency has primary responsibility for evaluating the technical information supplied by an offeror and determining the technical acceptability of the offeror's item. Alpha Technical Servs., Inc., B-250878; B-250878.2, Feb. 4, 1993, 93-1 CPD para. 104. Our Office will not question an evaluation of proposals unless the agency deviated from the evaluation criteria or the evaluation was otherwise unreasonable. IDB Int'l, B-257086, July 15, 1994, 94-2 CPD para. 27. The Army reasonably rejected Ericsson's proposal as technically unacceptable.