Amdahl Corporation, B-281255, December 28, 1998

B-281255 Dec 28, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Agency's technical evaluation of vendor quotations on computer systems was reasonable where performed in accordance with stated evaluation criteria and based on valid assessments of proposed systems. The RFQ set forth mandatory functional requirements and listed a number of six specific features which were desired. Vendors were required to submit quotations which specified all components and prices to implement the system. Vendors were required to describe how the proposed system met the requirements with references to commercial technical literature to substantiate satisfaction of the mandatory requirements. Vendors were also advised to "highlight any additional features. Quotations were to be evaluated under objective and subjective technical factors and price. View Decision Matter of: Amdahl Corporation File: B-281255 Date: December 28, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Amdahl Corporation protests the issuance of a delivery order to IBM under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 99-007, issued by the Bureau of the Public Debt, Department of the Treasury, for a complimentary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) processor. Amdahl challenges the order citing alleged flaws in the evaluation of quotations and in the price/technical tradeoff. We deny the protest. On August 12, 1998, Treasury issued the RFQ for a CMOS through a 36-month lease-to-own-plan (LTOP). The RFQ also included related requirements such as training, system manuals, publications, and a minimum warranty period. The RFQ specifically limited quotations to those under a General Services Administration (GSA) Nonmandatory Federal Supply Schedule (FSS), FSC Group 70, Part I, in conformity with the terms and conditions of the schedule. The RFQ set forth mandatory functional requirements and listed a number of six specific features which were desired, but not required. As a seventh "desired" feature, the RFQ sought "[a]ny additional features, functionalities, or capabilities offered which add value commensurate with the price differential." RFQ at 4. Vendors were required to submit quotations which specified all components and prices to implement the system. For mandatory requirements, vendors were required to describe how the proposed system met the requirements with references to commercial technical literature to substantiate satisfaction of the mandatory requirements. Vendors were also advised to "highlight any additional features, functionalities, or capabilities included with the offered system which they [felt] would provide added value to the Government." RFQ at 7. Quotations were to be evaluated under objective and subjective technical factors and price. The objective evaluation was to be conducted on a "pass/fail" basis and was to determine whether a quotation met all mandatory requirements. The subjective evaluation was to review the number and relative value added by desired features included in the quote and proposed maintenance for those offering it (as explained above, "additional" features were included in the rubric of "desired" features, even though they were separate from the six specified desired features). Desired features were considered "somewhat more important" than maintenance. RFQ at 8. The RFQ also stated that the government would weigh the inclusion of one or more of the desired features in its best value determination and that the government was willing to pay more for quotations which included one or more of the desired features. Price was to be evaluated by totaling the prices of items and services, plus other identifiable costs expected to be incurred by the government in order to implement and operate the proposed system for a 5-year system-life. The implementation/operating costs included, but were not limited to, maintenance which the government would have to acquire separately as a follow-on to the warranty period and any offered maintenance. Price was considered somewhat more important than the technical factors. Three vendors, including IBM and Amdahl, submitted quotations by the August 26, 1998 closing date. After evaluating the quotations, the technical evaluation team determined that both IBM and Amdahl's quotations met all mandatory requirements. They also found that IBM's proposed system provided all six specified desired features as well as nine additional features, five of which were considered of significant value, while the rest were considered of moderate value. Accordingly, the evaluators found IBM's quotation to be superior and ranked first overall. In evaluating Amdahl's quotation, the evaluators found that it provided five of the six desired features as well as three additional features, one of significant value and two of moderate value. The evaluators ranked Amdahl's quotation as superior and second overall.