TLC Systems, B-277095, September 2, 1997

B-277095 Sep 02, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Agency may reasonably restrict competition for fire alarm reporting system to equipment of a particular manufacturer where this manufacturer is the only one that can provide Factory Mutual-approved equipment capable of interfacing with equipment already installed at the agency. Where estimated value of procurement was beneath the simplified acquisition threshold of $100. Agency's use of simplified acquisition procedures was appropriate. Is unnecessarily restrictive of competition since the equipment of other manufacturers would satisfy the agency's needs. BACKGROUND The Navy's goal in conducting this procurement is to acquire a fire alarm reporting system capable of relaying alarm signals from nine military bases around the San Diego area to a single receiver located in a central dispatch office. View Decision Matter of: TLC Systems File: B-277095 Date: September 2, 1997 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION TLC Systems protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. N63387- 97-Q-5201, issued by the Navy Public Works Center, San Diego, California for installation of a radio fire alarm reporting system connecting nine San Diego area military base fire alarm systems with a central dispatch center. TLC contends that the RFQ, which requires King-Fisher radio transmitting and receiving equipment, is unnecessarily restrictive of competition since the equipment of other manufacturers would satisfy the agency's needs. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The Navy's goal in conducting this procurement is to acquire a fire alarm reporting system capable of relaying alarm signals from nine military bases around the San Diego area to a single receiver located in a central dispatch office. The local alarm systems on eight of the nine bases are wired; the ninth, the Marine Corps Recruit Depot (MCRD), has a radio reporting system consisting of King-Fisher transmitters and receivers (located on the base). The RFQ, as originally issued, did not specify King-Fisher equipment. It did require, however, that the system to be installed have been listed by the Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) or by the Factory Mutual System (FM) as a Public Fire Alarm Reporting System, in accordance with National Fire Protection Association (NPFA) Standards 72 and 1221. In addition, it required that the new receiver be capable of receiving transmissions from the King-Fisher transmitters already installed at MCRD. TLC complained to the agency and to our Office that these two requirements, taken together, limited offerors to offering the equipment of a single manufacturer, King- Fisher, since only King-Fisher offers a UL-listed or FM-approved Public Fire Alarm Reporting System incorporating King-Fisher transmitters. In other words, no "mixed" system consisting of King-Fisher transmitters and another manufacturer's receiver(s) has been approved by UL or FM. After reviewing TLC's protest, the Navy concurred with TLC that the requirement for an integrated fire alarm system, as written in the solicitation, limited the competition to companies offering King-Fisher equipment. The Navy therefore prepared a Justification and Approval for Other than Full and Open Competition (J & A) and amended the RFQ to require King-Fisher radio transmitting and receiving equipment. The agency explained in its J & A that restricting the competition to King- Fisher equipment was justified since no known manufacturer, other than King-Fisher, could provide UL- or FM-approved equipment capable of interfacing with the King-Fisher transmitters already installed at MCRD. ANALYSIS TLC disputes the agency's determination that only King-Fisher equipment will satisfy its needs. The protester contends that Signal Communications (SigCom), whose equipment it installs, offers an FM-approved system which incorporates transmission boxes capable of receiving and decoding radio signals from King-Fisher transmitters and retransmitting them to a SigCom receiver. The protester concedes that the SigCom boxes are not FM- approved to interface with the King-Fisher transmitters, but argues that it could satisfy the agency requirement for FM certification by obtaining, after installation, an FM Site Approval Certification of Compatibility. The Navy responds that FM "acceptance" of a system--which, according to the agency, is the proper terminology for what the protester refers to as Site Approval Certification of Compatibility--is not equivalent to FM "approval" of a system, and that it requires an FM-approved system. [1] In preparing a solicitation for supplies or services, a contracting agency must specify its needs and solicit bids in a manner designed to achieve full and open competition, 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2305(a)(1)(A)(i) (1994), and include restrictive provisions or conditions only to the extent necessary to satisfy the agency's needs. 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2305(a)(1)(B)(ii).