Sun Dial and Panel Corporation, B-277660, November 4, 1997

B-277660 Nov 04, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Agency reasonably did not invite protester to compete for emergency contract to provide a relatively small quantity of instrument mounting bezels for use in helicopters until agency can make award of a contract for a large number of bezels pursuant to a competitive procurement where: (1) bezels are critical to flying the helicopters safely. (2) agency had no bezels in its inventory and a large number of bezels were on back- order. (3) a number of helicopters were already grounded because of lack of bezels and more were expected to be grounded in the immediate future. Have to pass first article testing before the agency would consider them acceptable. Agency was unwilling to incur delay associated with first article testing and risk that the protester's bezels might not pass first article tests. View Decision Matter of: Sun Dial and Panel Corporation File: B-277660 Date: November 4, 1997 * Redacted Decision DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Sun Dial and Panel Corporation protests the Defense Supply Center Richmond's (DSCR) issuance, on a sole-source basis, of purchase order No. SPO440-97-M-PP02 for instrument mounting bezels (national stock number 6695-01-342-3191) [1] to Control Products Corporation (CPC) pursuant to request for quotations No. SPO440-97-Q-TF20. [2] The protester contends that the agency improperly did not solicit a quotation from it to fulfill the agency's urgent requirement for bezels even though the agency was aware that Sun Dial was interested in and fully qualified to manufacture the parts. We deny the protest. On July 16, 1997, the DSCR inventory management section requested an emergency purchase of 63 bezels for use as part of the horizontal situation indicators in UH--60A "Blackhawk" helicopters. The purchase request stated that the bezels were essential to the Blackhawk helicopter's mission and requested that every effort be made to obtain the fastest delivery possible. That same day, a DSCR contract specialist contacted CPC and orally requested that CPC submit a quotation containing its best price and delivery terms for 63 bezels. CPC's initial quotation stated a price of $1,300 per unit with delivery of all units 160 days after receipt of an order (ARO). The next day, the contract specialist orally requested that CPC provide faster delivery because some aircraft were already grounded. CPC responded that it would commit to delivering all units 120 days ARO and that it would try to deliver 10 units sooner. As CPC had previously supplied the bezels and had no record of any quality problems, the agency considered an award to CPC acceptable. Citing the statutory authority of 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2304(c)(2) (1994)--the unusual and compelling urgency exception to the general statutory requirement for full and open competition--the contracting officer determined on July 17 that a sole-source award to CPC was justified. On July 23, the agency issued a purchase order to CPC for 63 bezels at a total price of $81,900, and Sun Dial filed this protest shortly thereafter. The protester contends that DSCR should have asked it to submit a quotation for the 63 urgently needed bezels. The protester asserts that, even though cognizant agency personnel stated that this was an "emergency buy" necessitating a sole-source purchase from CPC, the agency was aware of Sun Dial's interest in supplying bezels because, at the time of the sole-source purchase from CPC, Sun Dial was (and still is) actively participating in another procurement for the same type of bezels that DSCR is presently conducting as a competitive procurement. [3] The protester also asserts that the agency knew that Sun Dial was interested in and was capable of supplying quality bezels in a timely manner because the engineering support activity (i.e., the United States Army Communications- Electronics Command) had, in fact, determined that Sun Dial's bezels were acceptable on July 16, 1997, just 1 week before the purchase order was issued to CPC on a sole-source basis. The Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) permits the use of noncompetitive procedures where the agency's need for the property or services is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the United States would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits proposals. 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2304(c)(2). While CICA requires the agency to request offers from as many potential sources as is practicable under the circumstances, 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2304(e), the agency may still limit the procurement to the only firm it reasonably believes can properly perform the work in the available time. Electro-Methods, Inc., B-250931, Feb. 26, 1993, 93-1 CPD Para.