Protest alleging that solicitation was unduly restrictive of competition is denied. The solicitation sought an item from a single approved source. GAO noted that the procurement was conducted under the FAR’s simplified acquisition procedures. When using simplified acquisition procedures, an agency can limit a solicitation to a brand-name item when the contracting officer determines it’s necessary. Here, the agency had made reasonable efforts to reverse engineer the rotor but failed. The original manufacturer still owned the technical data for the rotors. GAO had no basis to question the necessity of a single approved source.
The Defense Logistics Agency uses an air compressor manufactured by Denver Nash LLC in submarines. A critical component of the compressor is the rotor. DLA had a history a long lead times when trying to purchase those compressor rotors directly from Nash. So, DLA tried to reverse engineer the rotor. The agency solicited a prototype from Acme Products and Engineering. The prototype failed to function correctly.
DLA therefore decided to continue to procure rotors from Nash. DLA issued a solicitation under the FAR’s simple acquisition procedures for the rotors. The solicitation identified Nash as the single approved source of supply. Acme filed a protest challenging the single approved source of supply unduly restricted competition.
Acme alleged that DLA already possessed the technical drawings for the rotor and did not need to acquire them directly from Nash. DLA denied possessing the technical drawings. The only drawings it possessed were the result of its unsuccessful attempt to reverse engineer the rotor. Despite disagreeing with the Navy’s contentions, Acme had not provided evidence to show that DLA owned the drawings in question. Rather, the record showed that Nash still maintained the ownership and rights to its proprietary drawings.
In using the FAR’s simplified acquisition procedures, an agency can limit a solicitation to brand-name item when the contracting officer determines that the circumstances require it. Here, the agency had made reasonable efforts to reverse engineer the rotor but failed. Nash still owned the technical data for the rotors. GAO had no basis to question the single approved source.
Acme is represented by John M. Fredonia of Manfredonia Law Offices, LLC. The agency is represented by Julie K. Philips, John Pritchard, and Pamela K. Cooper of the Defense Logistics Agency. GAO attorneys Katherine I. Riback and Evan C. Williams participated in the preparation of the decision.
