Henschel, Inc., B-275390.5, May 14, 1997

B-275390.5 May 14, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Permits consideration of an alternate product that is physically. Protest of award to offeror of alternate product is sustained where agency failed to reasonably confirm that alternate product met material characteristics of named part number. The panels are used in airflow monitoring systems in ships. The panel is an integral part of the system and interfaces with an airflow sensor (not procured under this RFP) located in the ventilation duct of the monitored compartment. Henschel contends that the agency improperly determined that the panel offered by Dynalec was interchangeable with the named Henschel panel requested by the solicitation. The protester states that there are material differences between its named part and Dynalec's part. View Decision Matter of: Henschel, Inc. File: B-275390.5 Date: May 14, 1997 * Redacted Decision DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Henschel, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Dynalec Corporation under request for proposals (RFP) No. SPO430-96-R-2173, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for digital airflow panels. The panels are used in airflow monitoring systems in ships; the panel is an integral part of the system and interfaces with an airflow sensor (not procured under this RFP) located in the ventilation duct of the monitored compartment. Henschel contends that the agency improperly determined that the panel offered by Dynalec was interchangeable with the named Henschel panel requested by the solicitation; the protester states that there are material differences between its named part and Dynalec's part. The protester contends that the agency improperly relaxed material, more costly performance specifications of its named part. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP requested offers on digital airflow panels, Henschel Part No. (P/N) 20-300, but did not specify any functional or other characteristics of the named P/N item. The RFP included DLA's "Conditions for Evaluation and Acceptance of Offers for Part Numbered Items" (similar to DLA's former "Products Offered" clause) which allows firms to offer alternate products which are physically, mechanically, electrically, and functionally interchangeable with the product identified in the solicitation. The RFP informed offerors that a technical data package was not available from the agency for the specified Henschel P/N; offerors were required to submit sufficient technical data on any alternate product offered as well as the named P/N to enable the agency to evaluate the alternate product to determine whether it is interchangeable with the named P/N. Award was to be made on the basis of the offer of an acceptable product determined to be most advantageous to the government considering price and offeror past performance information. Two offerors responded to the RFP--Henschel offered its named product (at a unit price of $[deleted]) and Dynalec offered its panel (Dynalec P/N 62413-100, at a unit price of $[deleted]). Dynalec did not submit any technical data with its offer but stated in its offer's cover letter that its offered panel is "form, fit and function interchangeable and is currently being accepted by the Navy as an equal." After the closing time for the receipt of proposals, the contracting officer made a series of requests to Dynalec for additional technical data necessary for an evaluation of the Dynalec alternate product offer. Dynalec submitted summary data and narrative information regarding its offered product in response to those requests. DLA determined that Dynalec failed to provide adequate data, particularly pertaining to the Henschel P/N, to evaluate the firm's offer. On October 22, 1996, the agency awarded a contract to Henschel. On the same day, the contracting officer received additional data from Dynalec regarding the Henschel part. After reviewing the data submitted by Dynalec and conferring with a Navy engineer who advised DLA that he was familiar with the two companies' panels, a DLA technician on November 5 approved the Dynalec part as interchangeable and acceptable. [1] Following a protest filed by Dynalec with our Office on November 7, challenging the award to Henschel at a higher price than that offered by Dynalec for its panel, the agency reopened the competition and requested best and final offers (BAFO) from the two offerors. We dismissed as academic Dynalec's protest on December 17 in light of the agency's corrective action. [2] An award was subsequently made to Dynalec on January 27, 1997 (at the firm's BAFO unit price of $2,499, for a total contract price of $157,437); Henschel's BAFO unit price was $[deleted]. The initial award to Henschel has been terminated. ANALYSIS Henschel contends that the agency had no reasonable basis for its decision that the Dynalec part is interchangeable with its part as defined in the RFP's alternate product evaluation clause.