B-298935.2, M.Braun, Inc., May 21, 2007

B-298935.2 May 21, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights M.Braun, Inc. protests the issuance of a purchase order to Premier Technology, Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. RFQ-DC-06-00339, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for a glovebox to be used by the EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center in Denver, Colorado. We sustain the protest. View Decision B-298935.2, M.Braun, Inc., May 21, 2007 Decision Matter of: M.Braun, Inc. File: B-298935.2 Date: May 21, 2007 Thomas Dobbins for the protester. Kenneth A. Redden, Esq., Environmental Protection Agency, for the agency. Nora K. Adkins, Esq., Guy R. Pietrovito, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST An agency is not permitted to consider a late quotation, where the solicitation contained a late submission provision that limited the agency's consideration of late quotations, and no exception to the provision applied. DECISION M.Braun, Inc. protests the issuance of a purchase order to Premier Technology, Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. RFQ-DC-06-00339, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for a glovebox to be used by the EPA's NationalEnforcementInvestigationsCenter in Denver, Colorado. We sustain the protest. The RFQ, issued August 11, 2006 as a small business set-aside and a commercial item acquisition, sought quotations for a glovebox, which is a container that allows for the rapid identification of the exact chemical structure of hazardous substances in an isolated engineering controlled environment. Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1. The RFQ requested fixed'price quotations and included the following evaluation factors in descending order of importance: technical capability, past performance and price. The RFQ incorporated by reference the standard –Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items— clause of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) sect. 52.212'1, and required the submission of quotations electronically by 2 p.m., September 11, 2006. Vendors were informed that issuance of the –purchase order [would be] based upon 'best value' methodology.— RFQ at 2; Id. amend. 2, at 1. Three quotations, including M.Braun's, were received by the closing time for receipt of quotations. Premier attempted to submit its quotation prior to the 2 p.m. closing time, but its quotation, which included –zipped— files, was not accepted by the agency's electronic system.[1] After being informed by the contracting officer that the EPA could not accept zipped files, Premier resubmitted its quotation without zipped files. This submission was received by the agency at approximately 2:15 p.m., after the time set for receipt of quotations. COS at 2-3. Premier's quotation included the following –Clarifications and Exceptions— language: 1. This proposal reflects raw material pricing as of 9/11/06. Due to the current volatility of the steel markets, raw material pricing will need to be negotiated at time of release for fabrication. 2. Leak testing can be performed at 10 times normal operating pressure as indicated in the RFQ. Premier would like to propose mass spectrometer helium leak testing in accordance with American Glovebox Society Standards as an alternative to the specified method. Agency Report (AR), Tab 9, Premier Quotation, at 11th unmarked page. All four quotations were evaluated by the agency's technical review committee, which found that Premier's quotation complied –with the terms, expectations and overall quality as outlined in the statement of work (SOW).— The other three quotations, including M.Braun's, –while adequate, were judged lower in overall quality.— In this regard, the evaluation committee concluded that the protester's quotation –appeared to be a customization of a COTS [commercial off the shelf] production model and had limited details on the project plan.— AR, Tab 13, Technical Review of Quotations, Sept. 19, 2006, at 2.[2] After the technical evaluation, Premier transmitted an e-mail to the contracting officer, stating that –[h]ere is the revised document we spoke of. Let me know if there is anything further you need.— AR, Tab 14, E-mail from Premier to Contracting Officer, Sept. 20, 2006, at 1. Attached to this e-mail was a revision to Premier's –Clarifications and Exceptions,— which deleted the section that provided for future price negotiation. Thereafter, the contracting officer determined that Premier's quotation represented the –best value— to the government. AR, Tab 16, Source Selection Memorandum. On September 22, the EPA issued to Premier a purchase order, which provided for the installation of the glovebox by late May 2007. This purchase order incorporated by reference Premier's September 11 quotation, which included Premier's reservation of future price negotiation.