Sanitz Enterprises, Inc. (RFQ-1742203)

B-423374 May 30, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Sanitz Enterprises, Inc., a small business of Fredericksburg, Texas, protests the issuance of a delivery order to Containment Corporation, a small business of Murrieta, California, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1742203, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Federal Acquisition Service, for steel spill containment berms. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated its quotation. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Sanitz Enterprises, Inc. File: B-423374 Date: May 30, 2025 Charis B. Coolidge and Brent R. Haden, Esq., for the protester. Fallyme E. Guerrero, Esq., and James T. Van Biber, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Hannah G. Barnes, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the evaluation of the protester’s quotation as technically unacceptable is denied where the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Sanitz Enterprises, Inc., a small business of Fredericksburg, Texas, protests the issuance of a delivery order to Containment Corporation, a small business of Murrieta, California, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1742203, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Federal Acquisition Service, for steel spill containment berms. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated its quotation.[1] We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On February 3, 2025, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, the agency issued the RFQ to vendors holding GSA multiple award schedule contracts with Special Identification Number (SIN) 332999P, for spill containment units, containment pallets, and non-wooden pallets. Agency Report (AR), Tab A1, RFQ at 3. More specifically, the RFQ contemplated the issuance of a single firm‑fixed-price delivery order for 22 steel spill containment berms for Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington. Id. The agency explains that Joint Base Lewis-McChord uses drive-in steel containment systems to prevent hazardous substances from leaking into the environment. Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 1. The solicitation provided for award on a lowest-priced, technically acceptable basis, considering the following factors: technical and price. RFQ at 26. With regard to the price factor, the solicitation stated that once evaluators determined a quotation to be technically acceptable, the agency would evaluate the quoted price for fairness and reasonableness.[2] Id. at 30. Under the technical factor, the RFQ advised that the agency would review vendors’ technical packages on a pass/fail basis for the completion of a technical compliance document and for the submission of supporting literature demonstrating that vendors’ products “meet all required salient characteristics, specifications, and can deliver at least a portion of the requirement 30 days [a]fter [r]eceipt of [o]rder (ARO) and fulfill the rest by 90 days ARO.” Id. at 26. As relevant here, regarding the brand name or equal requirement for vendors to submit a product meeting all required salient characteristics and specifications, the solicitation’s required documentation included a technical compliance document for vendors to complete. Id. at 30. This attachment asked vendors to either confirm that their product was the brand name item listed in the solicitation--the Containment Corporation TriStar OPS Containment System--or that the product had trilinear sidewalls, fiberglass coating, and the ability to “relocate [the] filtration system on all four corners of the containment system.” Id. Finally, the solicitation incorporated the full text of a FAR provision concerning “descriptive literature,” defined as “information furnished by a bidder, such as cuts, illustrations, drawings, and brochures, that shows a product’s characteristics or construction or explains its operation.” Id. at 25; see FAR provision 52.214-21. The solicitation cautioned that if “the descriptive literature fails to show that the product offered conforms to the requirements of the solicitation, the Government will reject the bid.” RFQ at 25; see FAR provision 52.214-21. Two vendors, Sanitz and Containment Corporation, submitted quotations by the February 18 closing date for receipt of quotations.[3] COS/MOL at 1. Containment Corporation’s quoted price was $807,000, and Sanitz’s quoted price was $659,999. Id. at 4. Under the technical evaluation, the agency assigned a failing rating to Sanitz’s technical quotation based on its lack of sufficient supporting literature and its failure to provide a brand name or equal item.[4] Id. at 3.