Military Operational Systems, LLC (47QSCC-25-Q-0316)

B-423929 Jan 06, 2026 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Military Operational Systems, LLC, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Richmond Hill, Georgia, protests the award of a contract to Laine Industries, Inc., a small business of Lake City, Florida, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 47QSCC-25-Q-0316, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), for battery recovery and storage shelters. The protester contends that the awardee's quotation misrepresented the characteristics of the awardee's product, and that the awardee will not be able to provide a compliant product. We dismiss the protest because it raises a matter of contract administration that we do not consider as part of our bid protest function. View Decision Decision Matter of: Military Operational Systems, LLC File: B-423929 Date: January 6, 2026 Robert Ford for the protester. James T. Van Biber, III Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Suresh S. Boodram, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency's evaluation of the awardee's quotation as technically acceptable is dismissed where the awardee proposed to satisfy the solicitation's material requirements; whether the awardee will actually supply compliant end products is a matter of contract administration not subject to review by our Office. DECISION Military Operational Systems, LLC, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Richmond Hill, Georgia, protests the award of a contract to Laine Industries, Inc., a small business of Lake City, Florida, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 47QSCC-25-Q-0316, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), for battery recovery and storage shelters. The protester contends that the awardee's quotation misrepresented the characteristics of the awardee's product, and that the awardee will not be able to provide a compliant product. We dismiss the protest because it raises a matter of contract administration that we do not consider as part of our bid protest function. BACKGROUND On August 4, 2025, the agency posted the instant RFQ for battery replacement and storage shelters to Sam.gov.[1] Agency Report (AR), Exh. A, SAM Posting at 1. The RFQ was issued as a small business set-aside utilizing the simplified acquisition procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 13. AR, Exh. B, RFQ at 11; Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1. The RFQ provided that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering three factors: technical acceptability; past performance; and price. RFQ at 7. Technical acceptability was to be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. Id. As relevant to this protest, the RFQ defined technical acceptability as “meeting the characteristics listed in the [g]overnment's [i]tem [p]urchase [d]escription (IPD) and meets the [g]overnment's required delivery schedule of 120 days [after receipt of order] or sooner.” Id. Under the IPD, vendors were required to provide battery recovery pulse chargers that were both “fully automatic” and “featuring Pulse Technology (or other brand with comparable function and capability). . . .” Id. at 3. Only quotations that were determined to be technically acceptable would be reviewed for past performance and pricing. Id. at 7. In response to the RFQ, the agency received four quotations, including from the awardee and protester. AR, Exh. G, Award Decision Document at 3. Under the technical acceptability factor, the agency found that both the awardee and protester met the RFQ's requirements and deemed both quotations to be acceptable. Id. at 4. Neither vendor submitted past performance references and, therefore, were both rated as neutral confidence. Id. The agency thus used price as the distinguishing factor between the two vendors and found that the awardee's quotation was priced 8.05 percent lower than the protester's quotation. Id. at 5; COS at 1. Therefore, the agency found that the awardee offered the best value to the government and awarded the contract to Laine Industries at a total price of $249,909. AR, Exh. G, Award Decision Document at 6. On September 9, the agency notified the protester of its award decision. AR, Exh. H, Award Notification at 1. On September 19, the protester filed the instant protest with our Office. DISCUSSION The protester principally argues that the awardee will not deliver a compliant product upon contract performance.[2] Specifically, the protester contends that, based on the awardee's commercial literature and lack of past performance, the awardee will not provide battery shelters that are fully automatic or pulse chargers featuring pulse technology--or a product comparable in function and capability--as required under the RFQ. Comments at 1-2.