Matter of:CHI Fabrication Services

B-275079 Jan 22, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Protester's drawings and accompanying description did not indicate that all requirements were met. The solicitation included a "rough drawing of what the cart to be proposed should resemble" and instructed offerors "to provide all necessary drawings and data that will assure the functional features have been met. The solicitation required the cart to have the minimum dimensions of 51 inches height. The cart was to be "6 inches above the ground to prevent jamming onto the instep" and was to have 4 shelves. The solicitation further required the cart to have a minimum of five dividers for each shelf. Which were to be "constructed of stainless steel and in a manner that allows files to be kept upright. View Decision Matter of: CHI Fabrication Services File: B-275079 Date: January 22, 1997 Agency properly rejected protester's proposal as technically unacceptable where solicitation required offerors to submit drawings and data to establish that offered item met design requirements, and protester's drawings and accompanying description did not indicate that all requirements were met. Attorneys DECISION CHI Fabrication Services (CHI) protests the award of a contract to General Scientific Corporation under request for proposals (RFP) No. 52-PAPT-6-00009, issued by the Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce, for the design and fabrication of file/mail carts. The protester challenges the evaluation of technical proposals. We deny the protest. The solicitation contemplated the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract for a base year, with four 1-year option periods, to provide a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 300 carts. It included required dimensions, materials, and features of the cart, but left it to offerors to propose viable configurations. The solicitation included a "rough drawing of what the cart to be proposed should resemble" and instructed offerors "to provide all necessary drawings and data that will assure the functional features have been met," as well as a "bill of materials of all components which discloses the type and grade of materials and that they meet structural and design constraints as set forth." Generally, the solicitation required the cart to have the minimum dimensions of 51 inches height, 19 inches depth and 40 inches width, with stainless steel construction and caster wheels welded to the base. The cart was to be "6 inches above the ground to prevent jamming onto the instep" and was to have 4 shelves, each with the minimum dimensions of 11 inches height (distance between each shelf), 16 inches depth, and 35.5 width, with a retainer bar and latch mechanism in front to prevent files from falling out of the cart. The solicitation further required the cart to have a minimum of five dividers for each shelf, which were to be "constructed of stainless steel and in a manner that allows files to be kept upright," and "adjustable as well as removable from the shelf (not the cart)." While dividers were not shown on the drawing, the solicitation instructed offerors to include them on the drawings submitted with their proposals. The solicitation set forth two equally weighted technical evaluation factors--compliance with specifications and past performance--which were significantly more important than price, and provided for award to be made to the responsible offeror whose offer provided the best value to the government. The agency received eight proposals, 3 of which were rejected based on the initial evaluation. The agency held two rounds of discussions with the remaining offerors, including CHI and General Scientific, and gave those offerors the opportunity to submit revisions and best and final offers (BAFO). Following the initial evaluation, the agency advised CHI that its cart was noncompliant with the requirement that the dividers be adjustable as well as removable from the shelf, but not the cart. In response, CHI's revised proposal included a drawing which showed a black line, labeled sash chain, one end of which was attached to a divider, and the other to an unlabeled black dot (which was inside a circle). The firm's corresponding bill of materials indicated that the sash chain was 6 inches long. After evaluation of revised proposals, the agency advised CHI that its sash chain approach for the dividers was unclear and potentially hazardous. The protester responded by explaining that the sash chain would be welded to the retainer bar, and that the dividers when not in use would hang outside the front of the cart. The agency reiterated to the protester that its approach was not clearly shown on its drawing and was potentially hazardous. CHI's BAFO included additional drawings, including a top view, showing (1) a line, labeled sash chain, attached to an unlabeled black dot, and (2) five small half-circles, labeled sash chain, each attached to two unlabeled vertical lines.