Lavi Systems, Inc., B-282295, June 24, 1999

B-282295 Jun 24, 1999 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Notwithstanding that the awardee was not listed in the solicitation as an approved source. Contracting agency was not required to reevaluate the qualification of the awardee. There was no change of location or ownership of the plant where the part which met the qualification requirement was manufactured. The protester has not shown why removal of the awardee or its predecessors from the approved source list was warranted or that retesting of the awardee's part was required. 3. Is denied where the contracting agency has previously found that the awardee's part meets the specification. There is no evidence that the contracting agency has relaxed the specification for the awardee. Inc. and the protester) and to sources other than those listed that are approved prior to award. /2/ Id. View Decision Matter of: Lavi Systems, Inc. File: B-282295 Date: June 24, 1999 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Lavi Systems, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Teledyne Electronics Technology (TET), Lewisburg (Tennessee) Facility, by the United States Army Aviation and Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAAH23-99-R-0025, for a production quantity of 21 Caution Advisory Panels, National Stock No. 1680-01-225-5629, for the Army's UH-60 "Black Hawk" helicopter. /1/ We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price supply contract to the responsible offeror whose technically acceptable offer represents the lowest overall cost to the government. See RFP Secs. L-6, M-1. The RFP restricted competition to three listed approved sources (Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., Litton Systems, Inc. and the protester) and to sources other than those listed that are approved prior to award. /2/ Id. Secs. B, at 6; L-16. The RFP provided that a prospective offeror wishing to become an approved source must submit a Source Approval Request that complies with the requirements of the Competition Advocate's Shopping List, a paperwork qualification process established by agency procedures. Id. Sec. L-16. The RFP incorporated the standard Qualification Requirements clause, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 52.209-1. Id. Sec. I-68. That clause requires the offeror to have demonstrated that it or its product meets the standards prescribed for qualification prior to award of the contract and provides a space for the offeror to indicate whether it or its product has already met the qualification standards specified. The RFP contained a technical data package that included the original specification for the panel (as revised) from Sikorsky, the helicopter's prime manufacturer. Id. Sec. J, attach. 2; Contracting Officer's Statement Para. 3. The RFP required first article inspection and contractor testing of the solicited item. RFP Secs. B, at 6-7; C-1; I-69. However, the RFP provided that if the offeror has previously furnished identical or similar supplies to those solicited which have been accepted by the government, the contracting officer may waive the requirement for first article approval. Id. Sec. L-15. Such offerors were also encouraged to submit an offer based on exclusion of the requirement for first article approval as long as they furnished test reports or other evidence showing that the first article or production equipment they manufactured and delivered under any prior government contract has been approved or accepted by the government prior to the RFP's closing date. Id. Sec. B, at 7; L-15. When the contracting agency issued the RFP on November 5, 1998, it sent copies to the three approved sources for the item listed in the RFP (Sikorsky, Litton and Lavi). Agency Report, Tab Q, Prenegotiation Memorandum Para. 3. Sikorsky did not submit an offer. Contracting Officer's Statement Para. 2. In a letter dated December 7, Litton informed the agency that it was authorizing TET, its subcontractor on another Army contract for the panels, to submit an offer directly in its own name in response to the solicitation, in advance of an executed royalty/license agreement. Agency Report, Tabs I, J. The agency received two offers--from TET and Lavi--by the RFP's extended closing date of December 14. Contracting Officer's Statement Para. 2. TET's total price was $286,671 ($13,651 for each unit). Lavi's total price was $350,394.45 ($16,685.45 for each unit). TET, in the cover letter to its offer, referenced the December 7 letter from Litton to the contracting officer authorizing TET to submit an offer directly. TET provided first article test approval data for the item with its offer and listed the prior Army contracts it has performed for supplying the item, including the recent contract with Litton listed in the RFP's procurement history.