Caswell International Corporation, B-278103, December 29,

B-278103 Dec 29, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protest that interoperability requirement in solicitation for targetry equipment used for military training exercises is unduly restrictive of competition is denied where the requirement is based on the agency's need to ensure operational safety and military readiness. (ATA) is unduly restrictive of competition. The agency issued a combined Commerce Business Daily synopsis and solicitation for targetry equipment which was published on July 25. Will be used to support training for the 25th Infantry Division at a number of locations in Hawaii and will also be used as targetry that can be deployed by the 25th Infantry Division in support of its mission to South Korea. A site visit was scheduled for August 15 to allow interested vendors to view. View Decision Matter of: Caswell International Corporation File: B-278103 Date: December 29, 1997 * REDACTED DECISION DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Caswell International Corporation protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. DABT60-97-Q-0479, issued by the Department of the Army, for a quantity of commercially available targetry equipment used by the 25th Infantry Division stationed in Hawaii. Caswell contends that the solicitation requirement for interoperability with existing government- owned targetry manufactured by ATA Defense Industries, Inc. (ATA) is unduly restrictive of competition. We deny the protest. The agency issued a combined Commerce Business Daily synopsis and solicitation for targetry equipment which was published on July 25, 1997. The equipment under this RFQ, a total small business set-aside, will be used to support training for the 25th Infantry Division at a number of locations in Hawaii and will also be used as targetry that can be deployed by the 25th Infantry Division in support of its mission to South Korea-- the primary deployment site for the 25th Infantry Division. [1] The challenged interoperability requirement, listed in the performance specifications, provides as follows: All items procured under this contract must be fully interoperable with existing deployable range equipment procured from ATA Defense Industries. A site visit was scheduled for August 15 to allow interested vendors to view, operate, and take readings from government-furnished targetry equipment that was the same as the targetry equipment being used by the 25th Infantry Division. ATA was the only vendor that submitted a quotation by the August 22 extended closing date. That same day, Caswell filed an agency-level protest in which it argued that the solicitation improperly restricts competition because potential vendors, other than ATA, cannot meet the requirement for interoperability with ATA-proprietary targetry equipment. The agency denied that protest on September 10, and the firm's subsequent protest to our Office repeated this claim. [2] The agency explains that the interoperability requirement is necessary because the targetry equipment at issue here will be combined with existing government-owned ATA targetry to meet the multi-level training needs of the 25th Infantry Division. [3] According to the agency, if the range targetry equipment available to the Range Control Officer (RCO) are not interoperable, the RCO cannot pre-program the training scenarios in the way the exercises are going to occur nor, depending on the nature of the training exercises, rapidly reconfigure the targetry as needed. The result would be detrimental to military training and readiness, as the RCO may be unable to conduct division, brigade, and battalion-wide exercises. For example, when a division-wide exercise is conducted, all ranges and targets are utilized. Conducting the training and moving through the ranges with the soldiers are observer/controllers who evaluate and operate the targetry by means of a hand held controller (HHC). If the targetry being acquired were not interoperable with the existing targetry, the observer/controller would have to carry two different types of HHCs (the average weight for each is more than 10 pounds) to operate the targets and would need to keep track of which HHC operated the next target device. The agency states that the probability for a training incident is very high because most of these live-fire training exercises occur at night. VT at 13:27:01. To require the observer/controller to carry two HHCs would create an unacceptable risk which, the agency states, would threaten the safety of the soldiers participating in these live-fire training exercises. VT at 13:31:00. Further, since the 25th Infantry Division is routinely deployed to South Korea, the Army must have the ability to combine the targetry used by the 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii with the targetry on hand in South Korea.