Chant Engineering Company, Inc., B-281521, February 22, 1999

B-281521 Feb 22, 1999 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Procuring agency reasonably determined that protester's proposal was unacceptable and excluded it from the competitive range in a solicitation for a commercial item where the protester was not offering "commercial off the shelf equipment. Was merely offering to fabricate. The RFP was issued on May 5. Technical capability was significantly more important than past performance and price. The RFP stated that "each technical proposal shall enable Government evaluating personnel to make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination as to whether or not the proposal will meet the requirements of the government.". The agency determined that Chant's proposal was unacceptable as submitted because it was not accompanied by literature "that provides the information necessary to make a determination as to meeting any of the requirements" of the RFP. View Decision Matter of: Chant Engineering Company, Inc. File: B-281521 Date: February 22, 1999 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Chant Engineering Company, Inc. protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. N00164-98-R-0064, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane (Indiana) Division, for a manual electro-hydraulic servo valve test station for the Corpus Christi Army Depot. We deny the protest. The RFP was issued on May 5, 1998, under the commercial item acquisition procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12. RFP at 1. The RFP required the test station (also referred to as a stand) to "be commercial off the shelf equipment designed to assemble, troubleshoot and test aircraft proportional nozzle type and jet pipe type Electro-hydraulic Servovalves with various configurations." Id. at 17. The RFP included the full text of FAR Sec. 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions--Commercial Items, which incorporates by reference the FAR Sec. 52.202-1 definition of "commercial item." /1/ Id. at 6. Besides requiring the contractor to deliver, install, and test/check-out the test station, the RFP requires the contractor to provide the full coverage of any standard commercial warranty normally offered in a similar commercial sale (and to submit a copy of its standard commercial warranty with its offer), to provide commercial off-the-shelf operating and maintenance manuals (that "contain operation, maintenance, parts lists, and other instructions applicable to equipment designed and manufactured for commercial use"), and to train government personnel in the operation and maintenance of the test station. Id. at 2, 3, 8, 14, 16-17, Contract Data Requirements List exhibit (e). The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-priced contract to the responsible offeror whose conforming proposal would be most advantageous to the government, price, technical capability and past performance considered. Id. at 24. The RFP established that, for evaluation purposes, technical capability was significantly more important than past performance and price. Id. For technical capability, the RFP stated that proposals would be evaluated to ensure that the proposed test station, warranty, and training comply with the requirements specified in the RFP's performance specification and statement of work. Id. The RFP informed offerors that their test stations would be examined for compliance with the requirements of the performance specification and statement of work and that "[a]ny redesign or modification of the contractor's standard product to comply with [the] specified requirements . . . shall receive particular attention for adequacy and suitability." Id. at 21. The RFP instructed offerors that their proposals must include a technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the requirements in the solicitation, which may include product literature, or other documents, if necessary. Id. at 24. The RFP stated that "each technical proposal shall enable Government evaluating personnel to make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination as to whether or not the proposal will meet the requirements of the government." Id. The Navy received Chant's proposal, among others, by the June 23 due date. In its proposal, Chant listed the technical requirements in the RFP and stated that it would comply with each. The proposal included two drawings of the proposed equipment, and pictures and descriptions of other types of equipment that Chant has produced. Following the technical evaluation, the agency determined that Chant's proposal was unacceptable as submitted because it was not accompanied by literature "that provides the information necessary to make a determination as to meeting any of the requirements" of the RFP. Agency Technical Comments, Aug. 1998. The agency also considered Chant's failure to supply warranty information as a deficiency. Id.