Alleged Impropriety in RFP

A company protested the restrictive nature of two requests for proposals (RFP). The procuring agency claimed that the protests were untimely since they were not time/date stamped until after the time set for receipt of initial proposals. It was held that a telex machine indicated timely receipt of the protests, and only because of lack of personnel due to a heavy snowstorm, were the protests given a later time/date stamp. Therefore, the protests were considered on their merits. The agency also contended that the only drawings of the parts being procured were inadequate for comparison, and thus had to require interested firms to provide data with their proposals which would allow the Government to evaluate the acceptability of the firms products. The protesting company claimed that the agency did have drawings which it should have made available to interested firms so that they could manufacture identical items and submit competitive proposals. It was held that a contracting agency may properly restrict procurement of a part for military equipment to the original manufacturer's part or an identical product where the data in the agency's possession are inadequate to conduct competitive procurement or where the agency has only limited rights to data necessary for a more competitive procurement. The protests were denied.