Protest challenging the terms of a solicitation is denied, where the agency reasonably incorporated into the solicitation a modified industry technical standard for its newly development parachute system, and where the protester suggested no alternative standard that should be used instead. GAO also noted that its bid protest jurisdiction does not extend to requiring the agency to use more stringent technical standards.
Complete Parachute Solutions Inc. protested the terms of a request for proposals issued by the Marine Corps for parachutes, arguing that the agency should adopt more stringent specification and testing standards.
CPS challenged the incorporation of the Industry Association Technical Standard 135 into the solicitation because that performance specification and testing standard is used in connection with the fabrication and approval of civilian sport parachutes. The protester also alleged that TS 135 is intended for use in connection with the fabrication and testing of reserve canopies deployed in the event of the main canopy’s failure or emergency parachutes used in life-saving circumstances. CPS also explained that the design characteristics identified for a “high glide” parachute are fundamentally incompatible with the requirements of TS 135. Finally, the protester claimed that the solicitation contemplated the award of a contract based on proposals and bid samples without any requirement for testing and approval of the offered products prior to award.
In response, the Marine Corps argued that the enhanced multi-mission parachute system performance specification takes precedence over the terms of the TS 135, as stated in the RFP. The agency also argued that there are no agreed-upon or preexisting military or civilian standards for the fabrication and testing of its newly developed parachute system. The agency explained that the testing system used for the prior system led to uncertain risks and left questionable whether those standards could achieve the highest possible safety. In light of this, the agency explained that it adopted and modified certain TS requirements for their life-saving functionality.
GAO denied the protest, explaining that the protester’s attempt to have the agency adopt more stringent technical standards was outside of its bid protest function. Further, GAO noted that CPS had not suggested any alternative standards the agency should use or offered any empirical data showing why the agency’s method was inadequate. Given the absence of well-defined and well-recognized standards applicable to the Marine Corps’ new parachute system, GAO found no object to the agency’s decision to incorporate the TS 135 standard in its solicitation.
GAO also found that the evaluation scheme for the best value procurement was designed to reward superior system performance and superior system safety, and that under these criteria, the protester could show that it met or exceeded the RFP’s requirements. Finally, GAO found no reason to object to the agency’s decision to rely on proposals and bid samples to make its selection decision, rather than on a testing regimen conducted either before proposals are submitted or during the agency’s selection activities.
Complete Parachute Solutions Inc. is represented by William M. Jack and Amba M. Datta of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP; and Robert L. Feldman, of Law Offices of Robert L. Feldman. The government is represented by Korvin S. Kraics, United States Marine Corps. GAO attorneys Scott H. Riback and Tania Calhoun participated in the preparation of the decision.
