Gentex Corporation--Western Operations, B-291793; B-291793.2; B-291793.3, March 25, 2003

Gentex Corporation--Western Operations, B-291793; B-291793.2; B-291793.3, March 25, 2003 TITLE: Gentex Corporation--Western Operations, B-291793; B-291793.2; B-291793.3, March 25, 2003 BNUMBER: B-291793; B-291793.2; B-291793.3 DATE: March 25, 2003 ********************************************************************** Gentex Corporation--Western Operations, B-291793; B-291793.2; B-291793.3, March 25, 2003 DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Gentex Corporation--Western Operations File: B-291793; B-291793.2; B-291793.3 Date: March 25, 2003 David Z. Bodenheimer, Esq., Frederick W. Claybrook, Jr., Esq., Amy E. Laderberg, Esq., and Karen Hastie Williams, Esq., Crowell & Moring, for the protester. Ron R. Hutchinson, Esq., Gerard F. Doyle, Esq., and James D. Bachman, Esq., Doyle & Bachman, for the intervenor. Clarence D. Long, III, Esq., and Patrick F. Corbin, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Notwithstanding notice that competition was limited to firms that held prior contracts under a program definition and risk reduction contract for aircrew masks, a subcontractor was reasonably found to be eligible to compete under the terms of the subsequent solicitation for the development contract for the aircrew masks. 2. Protest that agency's inadvertent release of evaluation material resulted in an unfair competition is denied, where the record shows that the release did not provide the awardee with an unfair competitive advantage or competitively prejudice the protester. 3. Agency reasonably evaluated awardee's proposal under a solicitation for the development of aircrew masks, where the record shows that the agency fairly and reasonably considered the respective strengths and weaknesses of each proposal in accordance with the evaluation criteria and determined that the awardee's proposal was superior. 4. In a solicitation for the development of aircrew masks, agency did not hold unequal discussions regarding the affordability of one aspect of the masks, even though the agency asked the awardee, but not the protester, a specific question on this matter, where the record shows that the protester was already aware of the information provided to awardee and was permitted an equal opportunity to respond. 5. Agency reasonably assigned a weakness to the protester's proposal for failing to comply with the funding profile identified by the agency, where consideration of funding constraints was reasonably encompassed within solicitation evaluation criteria. 6. Where agency inquired whether awardee would consider variation in quantities and warranty clauses, technical transfusion did not occur, even though these clauses had been previously offered by the protester, because agency did not disclose innovative and unique approaches of the protester and the questions on these matters were neutral on their face. 7. Agency performed a reasonable cost realism analysis on the cost-reimbursement component and a reasonable price analysis on the fixed-price components of a procurement for the development of aircrew masks. DECISION Gentex Corporation--Western Operations protests the award of a contract to Scott Aviation[1] under request for proposals (RFP) No. F-41624-02-R-1007, issued by the Department of the Air Force for the system development, demonstration, and production of Joint Service Aircrew Masks (JSAM). Gentex challenges the awardee's eligibility for award, as well as the reasonableness of the agency's technical and cost evaluation. We deny the protests. BACKGROUND The JSAM program is for the development, manufacture, and fielding of a sustainable mask system that, in conjunction with a below-the-neck clothing ensemble, will provide nuclear, chemical, and biological protection to enable aircrew to fly in a chemical or biological warfare environment. The JSAM generally consists of a hood, oral-nasal mask, and lens assembly that is supplied with filtered air through a battery-powered blower system. The JSAMs are to be produced in different variants--one for fixed-wing aircraft and one for rotary-wing aircraft. The acquisition here involves a System Development and Demonstration (SDD) solicitation, which followed the performance of a Program Definition and Risk Reduction (PDRR) phase. The purpose of the PDRR effort was to perform engineering studies and develop prototypes for government evaluation. The SDD effort is intended to finalize product design for entry into production.