Twin Services, Inc.

B-415418 Jan 09, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Twin Services, Inc. (TSI), of Newbury Park, California, challenges the issuance of a purchase order to Aero Engineering Manufacturing, of Valencia, California, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SPE4A7-17-T-F607, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), for the supply of aircraft window curtains. The protester contends that it offered a product that met the solicitation's requirement to offer an "exact product" from an approved source. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Twin Services, Inc. File:  B-415418 Date:  January 9, 2018 Gina Fugatt, for the protester. Robert E. Sebold, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Lois Hanshaw, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the protester’s quotation is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation’s evaluation criteria. DECISION Twin Services, Inc. (TSI), of Newbury Park, California, challenges the issuance of a purchase order to Aero Engineering Manufacturing, of Valencia, California, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SPE4A7-17-T-F607, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), for the supply of aircraft window curtains.  The protester contends that it offered a product that met the solicitation’s requirement to offer an “exact product” from an approved source. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On May 10, 2017, the agency issued the RFQ as an automated solicitation through DLA’s Internet Bid Board System (DIBBS), and as a small business set-aside using the simplified acquisition procedures of federal acquisition regulation (FAR) part 13.[1]  RFQ at 1, 2.  The solicitation incorporated the terms and conditions of the DLA Master Solicitation for Automated Simplified Acquisitions Revision (DLA Master Solicitation), which incorporated Procurement Note L04, Offers for Part Numbered Items.  AR, Tab B, RFQ at 2; Tab D, DLA Master Solicitation at 1, 10.  This procurement note applies when, as here, a solicitation identifies an item only by the name of the approved source’s commercial and government entity (CAGE) code, a part number, and a brief description.  Tab D, DLA Master Solicitation, at 10.  Procurement Note L04 defines when an item is considered an exact product and when it is an alternate product.  Tab E, Procurement Note L04, at 1.  It states, in relevant part, as follows: (b) Exact product means a product described by the name of an approved source and its corresponding part number cited in the item description; and manufactured by, or under the direction of, that approved source.  An offeror of an exact product must meet one of the descriptions below. *  *  *  *  * (3) A manufacturer who produces the offered item under the direction of an approved source; and has authorization from that approved source to manufacture the item, identify it as that approved source’s name and part number, and sell the item directly to the Government. (4) A dealer/distributor offering the product of a manufacturer that meets the description in subparagraph (3) above.[2] Id. As additionally relevant here, the RFQ identified Aero Engineering and Lockheed Martin as the two sources approved to provide the product, and listed their respective product numbers and CAGE codes.