3K Office Furniture Distribution GmbH, B-292911, December 18, 2003

B-292911 Dec 18, 2003 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Which was issued on April 13. The solicitation contained highly detailed descriptions of the items sought and provided for issuance of an order to the vendor whose quotation was "most advantageous to the Government. It was of paramount importance to the customer that the furniture be readily reconfigurable due to the office's requirement for frequent work area adjustments. The RFQ required that the desks and extension elements have rail-based leg frame systems that would permit linkage of the pieces in a "free-floating. The only vendor whose quotation was determined technically acceptable was ENT. 157.32 euros) was lower than ENT's. Traverse rail system does not have the free-floating leg system. View Decision 3K Office Furniture Distribution GmbH, B-292911, December 18, 2003 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION 3K Office Furniture Distribution GmbH protests the rejection of its quotation and the issuance of a purchase order to ENT GmbH under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 61517-03-T-0201, issued by the Department of the Air Force for office furniture for a recently renovated building at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany. We deny the protest. The RFQ, which was issued on April 13, 2003, sought modular office furniture, including desks and desk extensions, chairs, cupboards, shelf systems, mobile pedestals, couches, and coffee tables. The solicitation contained highly detailed descriptions of the items sought and provided for issuance of an order to the vendor whose quotation was "most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered." The RFQ defined "other factors" as follows: Technically acceptable in accordance with the line item description: Must meet or exceed requested quality (to be evaluated based on descriptive literature and a sample of wood quality provided by offerors). At conclusion of evaluation, prospective awardee may be required to show furniture at site, for Contracting Officer's approval. RFQ at 3. According to the contracting officer, it was of paramount importance to the customer that the furniture be readily reconfigurable due to the office's requirement for frequent work area adjustments. Accordingly, the RFQ required that the desks and extension elements have rail-based leg frame systems that would permit linkage of the pieces in a "free-floating, well-connected, and stable manner." /1/ Seven vendors submitted quotations. The evaluators determined six of the seven quotations, including the protester's, technically unacceptable. The only vendor whose quotation was determined technically acceptable was ENT. On September 15, after soliciting a revised quotation for an increased quantity from ENT, the agency issued it an order in the amount of 244,332.15 euros. On September 24, 3K protested to our Office, contending that the furniture on which it had quoted complied with the specifications set forth in the RFQ and that its quoted price (162,157.32 euros) was lower than ENT's. The agency responded that 3K's quotation had been determined technically unacceptable because 3K had failed to furnish a wood sample, had quoted on the wrong quantities for several items, had furnished technical data regarding its chairs in German (rather than English), had not furnished technical data regarding its conference desks, and had not furnished a sample desktop. In addition, the agency concluded that the quotation failed to demonstrate compliance with the RFQ's technical requirements, as follows: - Desk frame does not comply with technical requirements. Traverse rail system does not have the free-floating leg system. As the system offered has a sliding top, which is bolted into the rail system, it is impossible to have a free-floating leg system due to a stability issue. - CPU brackets can only be attached inside or outside to the cross elements/legs and not in free-floating manner in a horizontal rail system. (As the main feature of the desk is not in compliance, the connecting elements such as pedestals, etc. were not further evaluated.) - Cupboards: Pull-out cabinets do not have a telescopic ball-bearing system. - Vertical tambour door units do not have a weight-depending pre-tensioned torque rod, which holds the door at any position. - Cupboards for Line Item 0001AF are not 6 Binders high. Size is 80x42x195 cm. - Line Item 0014BA through BC: Requested were cupboards and filing cabinets with top-boards and as required by Amendment 0001 requested with solid back walls. - Line Item 0015AB: Size is only 42 cm. deep instead of 60 cm. Technical Evaluation Report, Sept. 4, 2003, at 1-2. In reviewing a protest against an agency's evaluation of quotations, we examine the record to determine whether the agency's judgment was reasonable and consistent with the stated evaluation criteria and applicable statutes and regulations. American Artisan Prods., Inc., B-286239, Nov. 29, 2000, 2000 CPD Para.