Axxon International, LLC

B-412147 Dec 22, 2015 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Axxon International, LLC (Axxon), of Rock Hill, South Carolina, a small business, protests the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) award of a purchase order to Freeman Marine Equipment, of Gold Beach, Oregon, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. NMAN7200-15-01787CE, for weather-tight marine doors for the NOAA Research Vessel Hi'ialakai. Axxon challenges the agency's rejection of its quotation as unacceptable. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Axxon International, LLC File:  B-412147 Date:  December 22, 2015 Art Ward, for the protester. Lauren Didiuk, Esq., and Erin Masini, Esq., Department of Commerce, for the agency. Laura Eyester, Esq., Cherie J. Owen, Esq., and David A. Ashen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency misevaluated technical proposal is denied where record shows that protester’s product was reasonably determined to be technically unacceptable for failing to meet specifications. DECISION Axxon International, LLC (Axxon), of Rock Hill, South Carolina, a small business, protests the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) award of a purchase order to Freeman Marine Equipment, of Gold Beach, Oregon, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. NMAN7200-15-01787CE, for weather-tight marine doors for the NOAA Research Vessel Hi’ialakai.  Axxon challenges the agency’s rejection of its quotation as unacceptable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On August 7, 2015, NOAA issued a combined synopsis/solicitation, set aside for small businesses, for the award of 12 weather-tight exterior marine doors for NOAA Research Vessel Hi’ialakai, a ship operating out of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, that conducts dive intensive missions.  RFQ at 9; Agency Report (AR) at 1.[1]  The RFQ provided for award on a best-value basis to the responsible vendor submitting the quotation that was most advantageous to the Government considering the following evaluation factors:  (1) ability to meet the specifications per the statement of need; (2) delivery time; and (3) price.  RFQ at 10.  The RFQ specifically stated that offerors must supply all doors in accordance with the solicitation’s statement of need, which set forth eight technical specifications.  RFQ at 10; AR, Statement of Need, at 27-30.  The RFQ further provided that the standard Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items, applied to this acquisition.  RFQ at 9.  That clause requires that offers must include:  “A technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the requirements in the solicitation.”  FAR clause 52.212-1(b)(4).  Four small businesses, including Axxon and Freeman Marine Equipment, submitted quotations by the August 17 closing date.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 6.  On August 18, the technical evaluator requested that Axxon provide a specification sheet after noting that the protester’s quotation did not provide any specifications, which made it “hard to determine if in fact your quote is technically acceptable.”  AR, Tab 2, Original Bid Submission of Axxon, at 32‑33.  On August 19, Axxon stated in an email that “every Statement Of Need specification and requirement, is included in [the] bid pricing.”  Protest, Attach. 3, Post Bid Submission E-mails, at 5 (emphasis in original).  On August 21, the technical evaluator again contacted Axxon requesting the following: Please send drawing of the doors per my requirements and a picture of doors [that] you have constructed to this specification.  The original drawings you supplied [do] not represent the door as specified in the original SON [statement of need], and there [are] no drawings showing a complete unit. Id. at 2.  That same day, Axxon provided a drawing depicting an example of a finished marine sandwich door, but noted that while the drawing showed glass wool insulation, Axxon instead would substitute a red cedar core.  Axxon’s reply further stated that it could not provide a finished photo of doors meeting the specifications since these would be customized doors.  Id.