Shuttlewagon Inc. (6913G621Q300005)

B-419518,B-419518.2,B-419518.3 Apr 15, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Shuttlewagon, Inc., of Oak Creek, Wisconsin, protests the award of a contract to Innovative Quality Solutions (IQS), LLC, of Grandview, Missouri, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 6913G21Q300005, issued by the Department of Transportation for two railway car spotters. Shuttlewagon argues that IQS's railway car spotter failed to meet certain minimum technical requirements and should have been found technically unacceptable, and that the agency's evaluation applied an arbitrary and unreasonable standard in evaluating the awardee's quotation. 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:  Shuttlewagon Inc. File:  B-419518; B-419518.2; B-419518.3 Date:  April 15, 2021 Susan W. Ebner, Esq., Eric Whytsell, Esq., and Judith Araujo, Esq., Stinson LLP, for the protester. Matthew T. Schoonover, Esq., and Ian P. Patterson, Esq., Schoonover & Moriarty LLC, for Innovative Quality Solutions, LLC, the intervenor. Felecia R. McBride, Esq., Department of Transportation, for the agency. John Sorrenti, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that awardee’s railway car spotter failed to meet certain minimum technical requirements and should have been found technically unacceptable is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably determined that the car spotter met the requirements. 2.  Protest that the agency applied an arbitrary standard in concluding that the modifications required for the car spotter were minor is denied where record shows that the agency’s analysis was consistent with guidance in the Federal Acquisition Regulation and reasonable. DECISION   Shuttlewagon, Inc., of Oak Creek, Wisconsin, protests the award of a contract to Innovative Quality Solutions (IQS), LLC, of Grandview, Missouri, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 6913G21Q300005, issued by the Department of Transportation for two railway car spotters.  Shuttlewagon argues that IQS’s railway car spotter failed to meet certain minimum technical requirements and should have been found technically unacceptable, and that the agency’s evaluation applied an arbitrary and unreasonable standard in evaluating the awardee’s quotation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFQ under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12, acquisition of commercial items, and FAR subpart 13.5, simplified acquisition procedures, for two railway car spotters for the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.[1]  AR, Exh. 3.0, Combined Synopsis/Solicitation, at 4.  The RFQ contemplated award of a single, fixed-price purchase order to the vendor “submitting the lowest price along with a technical narrative that lays out an acceptable technical understanding and plan for meeting the [r]ailway [c]ar [s]potters configuration and delivery requirements of this [s]olicitation.”[2]  AR, Exh. 4, RFQ at 14. The statement of work (SOW) in the RFQ identified a number of different minimum requirements that each car spotter had to meet.  Id. at 4.  As relevant here, the SOW stated that the car spotters “shall be a commercially available model previously tested and approved with minor modifications as required to meet the requirements of this work statement.”  Id.  In addition, the car spotters had to conform to certain clearance requirements of the shipyard and also had to be painted yellow with black or navy blue trim.  Id. at 4-5.  The RFQ instructed vendors that a quotation had to include, among other things, a description of the ability to meet the requirements of the SOW; the “engineering effort if modification is required” for the car spotters to meet the SOW requirements; and the vendor’s understanding of the unique configuration of the car spotters, including shipyard clearances.  Id. at 11. The agency received quotations from two vendors, Shuttlewagon and IQS.  AR, Exh. 32, Tech. Eval. Rep. at 3.  The agency evaluated IQS’s quotation to be technically acceptable and found that it offered the lowest quoted price.  Id.; AR, Exh. 33, Pricing Review.  With regard to Shuttlewagon’s quotation, the agency found that it failed to include documentation demonstrating that Shuttlewagon’s quoted car spotter met all the minimum requirements, and therefore concluded that the quotation was technically unacceptable.  Id.  As a result, the agency made award to IQS.  AR, Exh.