Dehler Manufacturing Company, Inc.

B-416601 Oct 25, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Dehler Manufacturing Company, Inc. (Dehler), a small business, located in San Antonio, Texas, protests the issuance of a purchase order to Hi-Tech Bed Systems Corporation (Hi-Tech), under request for quotations (RFQ) No. W912DY-18-T-0089, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for barracks furniture. The protester argues that the agency improperly determined that it was ineligible for award, and contends that the agency's award to Hi-Tech was unreasonable. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision 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:  Dehler Manufacturing Company, Inc. File:  B-416601 Date:  October 25, 2018 Kristi Morgan Aronica, Esq., Weitz Morgan PLLC, for the protester. Karl W. Kuhn, Esq., and Garry L. Brewer, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Evan Williams, Esq., Nora K. Adkins, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging the exclusion of vendor’s quotation due to an expired System for Award Management registration is denied where record shows that the agency’s determination was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2.  Protest challenging the agency’s issuance of a purchase order is denied where the agency reasonably issued the purchase order to another vendor after the protester was found ineligible for award. DECISION Dehler Manufacturing Company, Inc. (Dehler), a small business, located in San Antonio, Texas, protests the issuance of a purchase order to Hi-Tech Bed Systems Corporation (Hi‑Tech), under request for quotations (RFQ) No. W912DY-18-T-0089, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for barracks furniture.  The protester argues that the agency improperly determined that it was ineligible for award, and contends that the agency’s award to Hi-Tech was unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On February 9, 2018, the Corps issued the RFQ as a small business set-aside, using the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4.  The RFQ provided for the issuance of a purchase order for various types of barracks furniture at Fort Irwin, California.  RFQ at 2.  The RFQ provided that the purchase order would be issued on a lowest-priced, technically acceptable basis.  Id. at 10.  As relevant here, the RFQ required vendors to be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of award.  Id. at 7.  The agency received quotations from several vendors, including Hi-Tech and Dehler, which were both found to be technically acceptable.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 2, Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 3.  Dehler’s quotation provided the lowest-price.  Id. at 1.  On May 9, 2018, the contract specialist sent an e-mail to Dehler, which read, “Please see Attached award for FT Irwin bldg. 864A please sign and return if you have any question please don’t hesitate to contact me.”  AR, Tab 3, Contract Specialist Email, May 9, 2018 (9:18 a.m.).  The document attached to the email was a Standard Form (SF) 1449, unsigned by the contracting officer.  Id.  Dehler signed and returned the SF 1449 to the contract specialist later the same day.  AR, Tab 4, Dehler Email, May 9, 2018 (12:17 p.m.).  The next day, Dehler requested that the agency amend the start date.  AR, Tab 4, Dehler Email, May 10, 2018 (3:29 p.m.).  On May 18, the contract specialist sent Dehler a revised SF 1449 with the amended start date requested by Dehler.  AR, Tab 4, Contract Specialist Email, May 18, 2018 (10:14 a.m.).  The revised SF 1449 provided to Dehler remained unsigned by the contracting officer.  Id.  On May 24, Dehler signed and returned the revised SF 1449.  AR, Tab 5, Dehler Email, May 24, 2018 (2:06 p.m.).  On May 29, Dehler emailed the contract specialist, stating in pertinent part:  “I am following up on this award to be sure a copy signed by the contracting officer will be forthcoming so that we can move forward with the project.”  AR, Tab 5, Dehler Email, May 29, 2018 (5:24 p.m.).  On May 30, Dehler’s SAM registration expired.  Protest, Exhibit H, SAM Email Notification, May 29, 2018 (11:57 p.m.).  On May 31, the contracting officer became aware of Dehler’s expired SAM registration, and concluded that he could not issue an order to Dehler due to its expired registration.  Contracting Officer Supp. Decl.