CairnsAir, Inc., B-278141, January 2, 1998
Case: B-278141
Agency:
Protester: CairnsAir, Inc., B
Date: 1998-01-02
Denied
B-278141
Jan 02, 1998
Jump To
VIEW DECISION
RELATED PAGES
GAO CONTACTS
Highlights
DIGEST Solicitation requirement for brand name equipment and parts is not unduly restrictive of competition where record establishes that the requirement reasonably reflects the need for compatibility of the various components with each other and with the existing inventory. The protester asserts that the RFQ's requirement for a brand name SCBA is unduly restrictive of competition. The requirement was for 70 SCBAs (consisting of both the air pack and face piece). The procurement was announced in the Commerce Business Daily and also advertised on the Electronic Data Interchange. Which are critical life-saving equipment. If they are not. Which are not compatible. The agency also states that it is prohibitively costly to maintain repair parts for several different noncompatible brands of SCBAs.
View Decision
Matter of: CairnsAir, Inc. File: B-278141 Date: January 2, 1998
DIGEST
Attorneys
DECISION
CairnsAir, Inc. protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. DABT01-97-T-0325, issued by the Department of the Army for self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), face pieces and haz-mat uniforms. The protester asserts that the RFQ's requirement for a brand name SCBA is unduly restrictive of competition.
We deny the protest.
The RFQ required that the equipment be manufactured by Survivair, Inc. and provided that no substitution would be accepted. The requirement was for 70 SCBAs (consisting of both the air pack and face piece), 70 additional face pieces and 6 haz-mat uniforms. The procurement was announced in the Commerce Business Daily and also advertised on the Electronic Data Interchange. A total of 22 vendors offering the required model responded by the original September 17 due date.
In a written "justification for other than full and open competition" issued by the agency in support of requiring the Survivair SCBA, [1] and in the agency report responding to the protest, the Army states that the fire protection division currently has over 40 of the Survivair SCBA units and that the SCBAs, which are critical life-saving equipment, must be of one brand because all air bottles, masks, regulators and back pack attachments must be compatible at a fire/emergency scene. The agency maintains that, if they are not, then during the stress of an emergency, a firefighter could pick up one manufacturer's tank assembly and another manufacturer's face assembly, which are not compatible. According to the agency, this may delay response and could lead to serious injury or fatality. Additionally, the agency determined that the equipment must also be compatible with its substantial current inventory to avoid the necessity of training emergency personnel in the use of several different systems and maintaining stocks of repair parts of several systems. The agency also states that it is prohibitively costly to maintain repair parts for several different noncompatible brands of SCBAs.
The protester maintains that it manufactures an SCBA that can fully and completely satisfy the agency's requirement and that the agency's needs do not require restricting the acquisition to only Survivair equipment. The protester maintains that, as long as the air bottles are of the same capacity and pressure rating, SCBAs by different manufacturers may be used interchangeably without endangering the life or safety of any firefighters.
In preparing a solicitation for supplies or services, a contracting agency must specify its needs and solicit offers in a manner designed to achieve full and open competition and to include restrictive provisions or conditions only to the extent necessary to satisfy the agency's needs. Acoustic Sys., B-256590, June 29, 1994, 94-1 CPD para. 393 at 3. The contracting agency, which is most familiar with its needs and how best to fulfill them, must make the determination as to what its needs are in the first instance, and we will not question that determination unless it has no reasonable basis. Id.; Corbin Superior Composites, Inc., B-242394, Apr. 19, 1991, 91-1 CPD para. 389 at 5. Specifications based upon a particular manufacturer's product are not improper in and of themselves, and may be warranted where the agency establishes that the requirements are reasonably related to its needs. Lenderking Metal Prods., B-252035, B-252036, May 18, 1993, 93-1 CPD para. 393 at 2; Chi Corp., B-224019, Dec. 3, 1986, 86-2 CPD para. 634 at 3. Our Office will afford particular deference to the technical expertise of agency personnel in defining the government's needs in cases involving safety equipment. Kings Point Mfg. Co., Inc., B-210757, Sept. 19, 1983, 83-2 CPD para. 342 at 3.
Here, we find reasonable the agency's explanation of its need for the SCBA to be fully compatible with current equipment.
Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...