Baldt Inc., B-278422, January 28, 1998

B-278422 Jan 28, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The proposal's reference to Canadian subcontractors that would be available to perform certain tests has no bearing on the determination as to whether the buoy chain will be manufactured in the United States because the tests are not part of the manufacturing process. Baldt contends that the buoy chain offered by Lister is not manufactured in the United States. Its proposal should therefore have been rejected by the agency in accordance with the terms of the solicitation and a provision in the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1996. Which prohibit the Coast Guard from procuring buoy chain that is not manufactured in the United States. (1) that is not manufactured in the United States. Or (2) substantially all of the components of which are not produced or manufactured in the United States. (b) The Coast Guard may procure buoy chain that is not manufactured in the United States if the Secretary [of Transportation] determines that. View Decision Matter of: Baldt Inc. File: B-278422 Date: January 28, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Baldt Inc. protests the award of a contract to Lister Chain & Forge Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. DTCG40-97-R-70029, issued by the United States Coast Guard for buoy chain. Baldt contends that the buoy chain offered by Lister is not manufactured in the United States, and its proposal should therefore have been rejected by the agency in accordance with the terms of the solicitation and a provision in the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-324, 110 Stat. 3901, 3984 (1996) (codified at 14 U.S.C.A. Sec. 97(a) (West Supp. 1997)), which prohibit the Coast Guard from procuring buoy chain that is not manufactured in the United States. We deny the protest. The RFP provided for the award of a firm, fixed-price contract for buoy chain. The RFP stated that award would be made to the offeror submitting the proposal representing the best value to the government, price and other factors considered. The solicitation listed the following evaluation factors in descending order of importance: technical, price, and past performance. The RFP also informed offerors of the applicability of 14 U.S.C.A. Sec. 97(a) to this procurement and paraphrased the restriction contained in that provision. Specifically, 14 U.S.C.A. Sec. 97 provides as follows: Procurement of buoy chain (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), the Coast Guard may not procure buoy chain-- (1) that is not manufactured in the United States; or (2) substantially all of the components of which are not produced or manufactured in the United States. (b) The Coast Guard may procure buoy chain that is not manufactured in the United States if the Secretary [of Transportation] determines that-- (1) the price of buoy chain manufactured in the United States is unreasonable; or (2) emergency circumstances exist. [1] The agency received proposals from five firms, including Baldt and Lister, by the RFP's closing date. Lister's proposal stated that it was "based on all the quoted products manufactured in our plant in Blaine, Washington," specifying that the chain would be "100 [percent] made in the U.S.A. including all components." Lister also submitted an alternate proposal which was based upon subcontracting "a portion of the chain . . . to our sister company in Canada," for which Lister explained that "[t]he U.S. made components of this proposal make up 83 [percent] of the total bid." The agency evaluated the proposals, and rejected three of the proposals because the buoy chain to be supplied would be of foreign manufacture. Discussions were held, and best and final offers (BAFO) were requested and received. After receipt of BAFOs, the agency rejected Lister's alternate proposal based on its determination that the proposal's inclusion of buoy chain manufactured in Canada rendered the proposal noncompliant with 14 U.S.C.A. Sec. 97(a). Lister's primary proposal expressly stated that the contract would be performed in Blaine, Washington. The only indication in this proposal that any work would be performed outside of the United States was the proposal's identification of subcontractors located in Canada that would be available to perform certain testing (if necessary). [2] This proposal was rated at 101.50 out of 125 points for technical merit and past performance at a price of $1,823,839. Baldt's BAFO was rated at 83.75 points at a price of $5,993,636. The agency determined that Lister's proposal represented the best value to the government, and made award to that firm. [3] Baldt protests that Lister's proposal should have been rejected by the agency because Lister will not, in Baldt's view, manufacture the chain in the United States. Baldt, while recognizing that 14 U.S.C.A. Sec. 97 does not define the term "manufacture," argues that the legislative history of 14 U.S.C.A. Sec.