B-311308, Advanced Seal Technology, Inc., June 5, 2008

B-311308 Jun 05, 2008 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Advanced Seal Technology, Inc. (AST) protests the issuance of an order to Quality Control Corporation by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), Defense Supply Center Columbus (DSCC), under request for quotations No. (RFQ) SPM7M3-07-T-D027 for seal assemblies, National Stock Number 4320-01-276-0822 (NSN 0822). We deny the protest. View Decision B-311308, Advanced Seal Technology, Inc., June 5, 2008 Decision Matter of: Advanced Seal Technology, Inc. File: B-311308 Date: June 5, 2008 Thomas Doepker for the protester. Mike Walters, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Eric M. Ransom, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that offeror was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to qualify its alternate item is denied where, although the procuring agency failed to promptly notify offeror of deficiencies in its item, the record shows that the offeror did not suffer competitive prejudice as a result. DECISION Advanced Seal Technology, Inc. (AST) protests the issuance of an order to Quality Control Corporation by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), Defense Supply Center Columbus (DSCC), under request for quotations No. (RFQ) SPM7M3-07-T-D027 for seal assemblies, National Stock Number 4320-01-276-0822 (NSN 0822). We deny the protest. NSN 0822 is a critical application item,[1] thus, a designated Engineering Support Activity (ESA) is required to approve all sources. DLA Instruction 3200.1. In this case, the NavalSurfaceWarfareCenter, Carderock Division is the ESA responsible for approval. The approval process consists of the evaluation of a technical data package (TDP) supplied by the potential offeror which, if found satisfactory, results in conditional approval pending an installation test to ensure the fit and function of the proposed alternate item. If the installation test is also satisfactory, the alternate item is approved and the offeror is listed as a qualified source. The only sources currently approved to supply NSN 0822 are Blackmer Inc., the original equipment manufacturer, and Quality Control Corporation, an approved alternate item manufacturer. In December 2005, in response to three DSCC solicitations for NSN 0822, AST attempted to submit a TDP for its proposed alternate item, PFS-0822-21A. AST was unable to submit its TDP because of various technical issues at DSCC. AST then filed agency-level protests regarding each of the solicitations and, as a result, DSCC accepted AST's TDP on January 6, 2006, and forwarded it to the ESA. In March 2006, while AST's TDP was under evaluation at the ESA, DSCC issued an order for NSN 0822 to another firm at a price higher than that quoted by AST. Concerned with the issuance of the order, AST enlisted the support of an agency contact that had assisted AST in becoming approved as a qualified source for various other NSNs. Comments at 2. Shortly thereafter the order was cancelled, and on May 15, AST's TDP was approved by the ESA. On July 10, DSCC again issued an order to another firm at a price higher than that quoted by AST. AST protested that order at the agency level, arguing that, because its proposed alternate item had been conditionally approved, it should have been given an installation test before the order was issued to another firm. AST's agency-level protest was sustained, and the order was cancelled. On October 12, DSCC issued an order to AST under which AST was required to submit two sample units of PFS-0822-21A for use in a first article test (FAT), to serve as the installation test of the alternate item. Even though the order included a FAT requirement, the FAT requirement was not added to the DSCC FAT monitor's tracking system. Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, Affidavit, at 2. As a result, the FAT was never scheduled and the contract administrator, believing that the alternate item was approved, directed AST to expedite delivery of the entire 145 unit order. Id.AST delivered the entire order to the agency on December 8. Comments at 3. However, because the FAT never occurred, AST was not approved as a qualified source. On May 11, 2007, DSCC issued another RFQ for NSN 0822. Because AST's alternate item had still not undergone an installation test, AST was not listed as a qualified source on the RFQ. Nevertheless, on May 21, believing that it had been approved, AST filed a protest with our Office, challenging DSCC's failure to list it in the RFQ. Through the development of that protest, AST eventually learned that its alternate item had never been subjected to an installation test.