Phoenix Technical Services Corporation, B-274694.2, March 12,

B-274694.2 Mar 12, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Procuring agency's decision to combine engineering support services for various electrical and avionics systems primarily on the C-130 and the C-141 aircraft is reasonable where agency has shown that the combination represents its minimum needs to obtain necessary systems integration. Protest that procurement for various engineering support services should have been set aside for exclusive small business participation is denied where the record shows that the contracting officer did not abuse his discretion in determining that there was not a reasonable expectation of receiving proposals from at least two responsible small business offerors. The solicitation is for engineering support services for various electrical and avionics systems primarily on the C-130 and the C-141 aircraft. View Decision Matter of: Phoenix Technical Services Corporation File: B-274694.2 Date: March 12, 1997 * Redacted Decision DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Phoenix Technical Services Corporation protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. F09603-96-R-13361, issued by the Department of the Air Force for avionics engineering services at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (ALC). The solicitation is for engineering support services for various electrical and avionics systems primarily on the C-130 and the C-141 aircraft, otherwise known as the electrical/avionics systems engineering support (EASES) program. Phoenix, a small business concern, challenges the agency's combining various engineering services into one requirement as unduly restrictive of competition and maintains that the procurement should be set aside for exclusive small business participation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency has previously procured electrical and avionics engineering support services for the C-130 and C-141 aircraft at the Warner Robins ALC by entering into sole source contracts under a basic ordering agreement with Arinc Research Corporation, which is not a small business. The agency established the EASES program to provide the government with access to highly qualified engineers with the wide variety of expertise required to support electrical and avionics systems from more than one vendor. The EASES solicitation at issue is structured to allow award of up to five indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts to firms who will then compete for individual task orders. Once a firm is successful in obtaining an IDIQ contract, and then receives a task order for a specific project, that firm will organize and manage a project team to work with minimal government interaction. [1] The EASES program primarily involves engineering support for electrical or avionics modification programs which requires expertise in many different areas such as aircraft power systems design and analyses, aircraft structural modifications and analyses, and real-time software design and analyses. In addition to the expertise required to support modification programs in general, specific programs often involve state-of-the-art designs in radar systems, aircraft instruments, and aircraft display systems. Along with the support of modification programs, the EASES program includes requirements to support independent studies, analyses, C-130 production aircraft, test programs, and special modification programs. [2] On June 30, 1995, the agency published a synopsis of the solicitation in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) and received 50 inquiries in response. In July, the Warner Robins Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (SADBU) Office initiated a market survey to assess the capability of the potential offerors to meet the government's requirements. Respondents to the market survey were asked to identify and describe their experience in five broad categories of requirements that would be part of the EASES program and describe their experience in performing technical evaluations of the design and integration for the eight primary systems found on most aircraft. [3] The agency received 21 responses to the market survey, including 2 from firms eligible for contract awards under section 8(a) of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 637(a) (1994), 3 from other small disadvantaged firms, 5 from small businesses, and 11 from large businesses. The responses to the market survey were evaluated by engineers from the C-130 and the C-141 programs and a representative from the agency's SADBU Office. Of the nine small business respondents to the market survey, four potential offerors were considered capable of performing more than 50 percent of the work; however, of these four, only one--TCS Design and Management Services--was identified as capable because it had experience in all of the basic areas. Based on the foregoing, the contracting officer determined that the RFP should not be issued as a total small business set-aside.