Martin Electronics, Inc.--Costs, B-291732.2, April 22, 2003

B-291732.2 Apr 22, 2003 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights In the face of a clearly meritorious protest that the agency's selection of one awardee was unreasonable and unsupported and that the agency's evaluation of another awardee's proposal was inconsistent with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria. The cartridge is an illuminating 40mm round which is shoulder-fired from grenade launchers and used for training and combat to illuminate the battlefield. Offerors were advised that award might be made without the conduct of discussions. Award was to be made to a firm whose proposal represented the best value to the government. Which was to be determined after an integrated assessment of five evaluation factors: recent. The first three evaluation factors were of equal importance. View Decision Martin Electronics, Inc.--Costs, B-291732.2, April 22, 2003 * REDACTED DECISION DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Martin Electronics, Inc. (MEI) requests that our Office recommend that it be reimbursed the reasonable costs of filing and pursuing its protest challenging awards made to Pyrotechnic Specialties, Inc. (PSI) and Valentec Systems, Inc., by the U.S. Army Operations Support Command (OSC) under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAAA09-02-R-0078 for M583A1 White Star Parachute 40mm cartridges. After receipt of the protester's comments on the agency's supplemental report, and after our Office scheduled a hearing, the agency took corrective action in response to the protest. Based upon the corrective action, we dismissed the protest as academic. MEI contends that the agency unduly delayed taking corrective action in the face of its clearly meritorious protest. We grant the protester's request and recommend that the agency reimburse the protester its reasonable costs of filing and pursuing the protest. The OSC issued the solicitation on May 3, 2002 seeking fixed-price proposals from firms that could provide 138,134 M583A1 White Star Parachute 40mm cartridges, with a 100 percent evaluated option. The cartridge is an illuminating 40mm round which is shoulder-fired from grenade launchers and used for training and combat to illuminate the battlefield. MEI holds a current OSC contract to provide these cartridges. The Army planned to award one contract, but reserved the right to make a split award based upon a 61/39 percent division of the requirement. RFP Sec. A.l. Offerors were advised that award might be made without the conduct of discussions. Id. Sec. A.i. Award was to be made to a firm whose proposal represented the best value to the government, which was to be determined after an integrated assessment of five evaluation factors: recent, relevant past performance; product-to-process enhancement efforts; technical capability; price; and small business utilization. RFP Sec. M-1, amend. 1. The first three evaluation factors were of equal importance, and were significantly more important than price. /1/ With respect to the recent, relevant past performance factor, the RFP defined "recent" as occurring within the 3 years prior to the solicitation closing date, and defined "relevant" as "producing the same or similar items, requiring the same or similar manufacturing processes, skills, and abilities." Id. The recent, relevant past performance factor was comprised of two equally important subfactors, on-time delivery and quality. Offerors were required to submit a description of their government/commercial contracts received or performed during the 3 years prior to closing of this solicitation; these descriptions were to address such things as whether deliveries had been made on time and whether any quality problems had been encountered. RFP Sec. L-9(a). Section M-1 of the solicitation characterized the product-to-process enhancement efforts factor as: Information provided by the offeror that demonstrates contractor's efforts to incorporate process improvements and initiatives to enhance product or performance on same or similar items. Information provided by the offeror on internal programs or innovations initiated by the offeror, based on production experience or knowledge of product-to-process inter-relationships, that resulted in recommended design or production process changes to improve the item or its performance. Five firms submitted proposals by the June 28 closing date. The Army's source selection evaluation board (SSEB) evaluated the proposals, conducted preaward surveys of the three offerors at issue here, and arrived at the following evaluation results: . MEI PSI Valentec Recent, Relevant Past Performance Good Good Neutral . (On-Time Delivery) (Good) (Good) (Neutral) . (Quality) (Good) (Good) (Neutral) Product-to-Process Enhancement Excellent Excellent Neutral Efforts Technical Capability Excellent Excellent Excellent Price . 100 percent of the requirement [DELETED] [DELETED] [DELETED] . 61 percent of the requirement [DELETED] [DELETED] [DELETED] .