Failure to Provide Make and Model as Required in Solicitation Made Offer Unacceptable

The Department of Defense, Defense Information Systems Agency (“DISA”), sought telecommunications services that would be used by the U.S. Army in Iraq.  Alliance Networks failed to list the make and model number of all equipment that it or any subcontractor would use at the point of interface with the Government’s network.  Alliance Networks, WLL, B-422995, Dec. 31, 2024.

DISA sought a vendor to provide a commercial unchannelized, unprotected ethernet circuit lease in Iraq that would be used by the US Army in Iraq.  The solicitation included a requirement for DITCO [Defense Information Contracting Organization] additional telecommunications text—52—approved products list,” otherwise referred to as the “DATT [Defense Attache] requirement.  The solicitation required the vendor to list the make and model number of all equipment the contractor or any subcontractor will use at the point of interface with the government’s network.  In additional to providing that information, each vendor was required to provide the following statement “By submission of this quote, I certify that I understand the provision outlined and will comply.” The solicitation warned that a failure to list the specific equipment or inclusion of equipment not on the agency’s approved list “may result in the quote being deemed not technically acceptable. The Solicitation further emphasized that a quotation “must comply with all DATTs…to be deemed technically acceptable.

In evaluating the quotes, the agency deemed Alliance’s unacceptable because it did not meet the DATT requirement (proposed equipment wasn’t listed and documented, and Alliance’s quote did not include a list of the make and model number of each item.) Alliance’s quote simply stated “By submission of this quote, I certify that I understate the provision outlined and will comply.”  Alliance protested to the Government Accountability Office (“GAO” the agency determination that its quote was technically unacceptable, although it acknowledged that it had omitted the specific make and model of the equipment interfacing with the government network.

The agency explained the reason that the make or model had to be quoted was that the approved product list requires products to have undergone testing and certification for interoperability in order to be used by DOD, as it is a matter of critical national and international security and emergency preparedness.

Alliance made several arguments including that the agency failed to engage in discussions—which were not required by the solicitation.  Alliance stated that it had previously bid under similar circumstances and the agency had allowed clarifications, and that its quotation was the same as its successful proposal under a separate procurement for the same agency.  GAO denied both grounds, noting that discussions were not required and that each procurement stands on its own and prior agency actions are not relevant to this procurement.   The GAO denied the protest.

Takeaway:  Ready solicitations carefully Comply with ever request stated in the solicitation, even if you have received awards without certain items in the past.  Each solicitation is a separate issue at the GAO.

For other helpful suggestions on government contracting, visit:

Richard D. Lieberman’s FAR Consulting & Training at https://www.richarddlieberman.com/, and Mistakes in Government Contracting at https://richarddlieberman.wixsite.com/mistakes