B-299918, Nautical Control Solutions, LP, October 1, 2007

B-299918 Oct 01, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Nautical Control Solutions, LP protests the decision of the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, not to fund Nautical's phase I proposal under Department of Defense (DOD), Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program solicitation No. FY07.1. We deny the protest. View Decision B-299918, Nautical Control Solutions, LP, October 1, 2007 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: Nautical Control Solutions, LP File: B-299918 Date: October 1, 2007 Dayle C. Pugh, Esq., and Kyle A. Spelman, Esq., Bateman Pugh LLP, for the protester. Andrew Saunders, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Charles W. Morrow, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging procuring agency's decision not to fund proposal under phase I of the Department of Defense, Small Business Innovation Research Program is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably evaluated the proposal. DECISION Nautical Control Solutions, LP protests the decision of the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, not to fund Nautical's phase I proposal under Department of Defense (DOD), Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program solicitation No. FY07.1.[1] We deny the protest. The solicitation included Navy Topic N07-060, –Shipboard Energy Conservation and Fuel Management Decision Tools.— The objective of this topic was to –[d]emonstrate an approach that will provide a quantitative energy conservation and fuel management analysis and decision tool for the purposes of optimizing a ship's operating profile.— The Navy explains that in light of escalating fuel prices since 2004, the Navy has placed critical importance on developing energy conservation and fuel management analysis tools. Toward this end, the topic sought proposals to develop an automated approach to quantitatively collect, analyze, and present data to enable the ship's force to utilize energy conservation and fuel management solutions based on dynamic real-time, ship-specific variables. The tool was required to be able to interface with the Integrated Condition Assessment System (ICAS) for the purposes of obtaining machinery system performance data; to identify other ship sensors that could provide ship performance and weather data as the development of the tool progressed; and to be based on the use of open architecture principles. See Agency Report, Tab 2, Topic N07-060, at 76-77. The solicitation contemplated multiple awards of fixed-priced contracts for Phase I, under which the contractors were required to do the following: Demonstrate the feasibility of an approach for an automated energy conservation and fuel management tool for shipboard use. Establish validation goals and metrics to analyze the feasibility of the proposed solution(s). Provide a Phase II development approach and schedule that contains discrete milestones for product development. Id. at 77. The Navy received 14 proposals in response to the solicitation for this topic. The proposals were evaluated by three evaluators based upon a 100-point scale considering the following evaluation criteria: The soundness, technical merit, and innovation of the proposed approach and its incremental progress toward topic or subtopic solution [40 points]. The qualifications of the proposed principal/key investigators, supporting staff, and consultants [30 points]. The potential for commercial (Government or private sector) application and the benefits expected to accrue from this commercialization [30 points]. Solicitation at 11. Nautical's proposal for this topic, which was based upon its commercially available and patented technology product (FuelTrax) that provides fuel monitoring and optimization to commercial marine fleets, received the seventh highest score of 64 points.[2] With respect to Nautical, the Navy found as follows: Proposal was not recommended for award based on overall scoring. Scoring between the three evaluators appeared consistent. Needs much more technical detail in regard to interfacing with ship systems. Fair discussion of FuelTrax (existing product), but lacks details as to fit for Naval ship systems. Lack of significant commitment or partnering with commercialization candidate for a finished product. Also lack of transition plan to Naval ships. Limited Experience with Naval Ship Systems. Agency Report, Tab 4, Evaluation Summary, at 1.