Colmek Systems Engineering, B-291931.2, July 9, 2003

B-291931.2 Jul 09, 2003 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protest that contracting agency improperly evaluated protester's proposal is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria. Which logically encompassed the area for which the protester's proposal was downgraded. The Navy anticipates that the integration of navigation and sonar tools in the underwater imaging system (UIS) it is procuring here will enhance warfighter effectiveness by allowing a single diver to operate the tools simultaneously and will greatly enhance underwater area searches and location capabilities. Since this is the initial production contract for the UIS. The contractor is first required to conduct a pre-production evaluation of the build-to-print technical data package (TDP) to resolve any TDP deficiencies that would make it impossible to produce. View Decision Colmek Sys Eng'g, B-291931.2, July 9, 2003 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Colmek Systems Engineering, Inc. protests the award of a contract to RD Instruments (RDI) under request for proposals (RFP) No. N00174-02-R-0067, issued by the Department of the Navy for the production, delivery, and support of the MK 15 MOD 0 Underwater Imaging System for use by the Navy's explosive ordnance disposal forces. Colmek argues that the Navy improperly evaluated its proposal and improperly made award on the basis of initial proposals, without conducting discussions. We deny the protest. To eliminate hazardous ordnance that jeopardizes military operations, the Navy's explosive ordnance disposal forces must search, detect, locate, and classify mines and other explosive threats during explosive ordnance disposal mine counter-measure operations. The Navy anticipates that the integration of navigation and sonar tools in the underwater imaging system (UIS) it is procuring here will enhance warfighter effectiveness by allowing a single diver to operate the tools simultaneously and will greatly enhance underwater area searches and location capabilities. The UIS consists of a diver-held unit, two navigation beacons for long baseline navigation, a battery and battery charger, ancillary equipment, and supporting documentation. RFP Statement of Work (SOW) Para. 1.0. The solicitation anticipated the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract with fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee orders to perform various services over a 10-year period. Since this is the initial production contract for the UIS, the contractor is first required to conduct a pre-production evaluation of the build-to-print technical data package (TDP) to resolve any TDP deficiencies that would make it impossible to produce, fabricate, or assemble the contract items in the quantities specified in exact accordance with the TDP, and to incorporate any necessary changes prior to production. SOW Para. 3.1. After this process has been completed, the contractor is required to fabricate four first article test units. Pending first article test acceptance, and if funded, the contractor is required to fabricate, build, assemble, and test up to 222 UIS units performing all inspections, calibration procedures, checkout procedures, and packaging necessary for delivery to the government. Id. Para. 3.2. Finally, the contractor is required to provide various services in support of the UIS units over the life of the contract. Id. Paras. 3.3, 3.4. Award was to be made to the firm whose offer represented the best overall value to the government following a two-phase evaluation process. Under the first phase, the Navy planned to consider, on a pass/fail basis, whether a submission included the offer/proposal, technical approach information, offeror capability information, a small business subcontracting plan (if applicable), and cost and price information. Only those submissions receiving a "pass" rating could be considered for further evaluation. Under the second phase, the Navy planned to evaluate offers against four factors: technical approach, offeror capability, small business subcontracting plan (if applicable) /1/, and cost/price. The technical approach factor was more important than the offeror capability factor, which was significantly more important than cost/price. RFP Sec. M.I. The technical approach factor was comprised of five subfactors worth a total of 100 points: summary, pre-production and production evaluation, production plan, supply support services, and engineering services. These subfactors are listed in descending order of importance except for the least important summary subfactor. Id. The offeror capability factor was comprised of two subfactors, relevant experience and past performance; the former was more important than the latter. Id. Source selection was to be determined using a specified methodology.