Custom Printing Company--Request for Costs, B-275798.3, July

B-275798.3 Jul 09, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protester's request to recover the costs of filing and pursuing its protest challenging an agency's evaluation of bid prices is granted where the agency failed to promptly or adequately investigate the clearly meritorious protest allegations questioning the propriety of the agency's calculations. The IFB was issued on October 9. "are a factor in determining award" and required bidders to "state the location of the plant from which [the publications] will be shipped.". Five bids were received. Which were randomly selected by TMS. The contracting officer determined that Braceland Brothers was the apparent low bidder. CPC was the second lowest-priced bidder. Most of the publications required under this contract (approximately 90 percent) are to be delivered to St. View Decision Matter of: Custom Printing Company--Request for Costs File: B-275798.3 Date: July 9, 1997 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Custom Printing Company (CPC) requests that we recommend it recover the costs of filing and pursuing its protest challenging the evaluation of bid prices under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 1513-P, issued by the Government Printing Office (GPO) for the production and distribution of various Army publications. We grant the request. The IFB was issued on October 9, 1996, and contemplated the award of a 1-year contract to the responsible bidder submitting the lowest-priced, responsive bid. The IFB advised bidders that GPO would determine the lowest bid by applying the unit prices submitted in each bidder's itemized pricing schedule to a corresponding list of estimated production quantities set forth at page 18 of the IFB. The solicitation also advised bidders that "[t]ransportation charges"--the cost of shipping the publications from the contractor's production facility to the designated delivery site--"are a factor in determining award" and required bidders to "state the location of the plant from which [the publications] will be shipped." By the November 8 bid opening date, five bids were received. On November 13, the contracting officer asked the agency's transportation management section (TMS) to calculate the transportation charges to be added to each bidder's total price. Using 50 delivery orders issued under the predecessor contract for this requirement--which were randomly selected by TMS--TMS provided the contracting officer with a list of "estimated shipping charges" for each bidder. After adding each bidder's estimated transportation charges to its bid, the contracting officer determined that Braceland Brothers was the apparent low bidder, and CPC was the second lowest-priced bidder. Most of the publications required under this contract (approximately 90 percent) are to be delivered to St. Louis, Missouri. CPC's production facility is located in Owensville, Missouri, and in its bid CPC stated that "all shipments will be made to St. Louis at no additional cost to the government." In contrast, Braceland Brothers's bid did not offer any transportation rate discounts; moreover, Braceland Brothers's bid stated that all shipments would be made from an Atlanta, Georgia facility. On November 20, after learning that GPO intended to award the contract to Braceland Brothers, CPC--which was the incumbent for this requirement--filed an agency-level protest with the contracting officer. CPC contended that "[a] review of the print orders which we have produced over the past two years indicates to us that Braceland Brothers' freight assessment should be much larger than ours." CPC also provided a detailed breakdown of its transportation charge calculations and, relying on this breakdown, argued that the agency's apparently different pricing evaluation results "seem[] to be skewed." On November 27, in exchange for the contracting officer's promise that the agency would reassess its evaluated transportation costs, CPC withdrew its protest. The contracting officer then forwarded a copy of CPC's withdrawn agency-level protest to TMS and asked for a recalculation of the bidders' transportation costs. Using the estimated quantities and destination sites set forth in 107 purchase orders from the predecessor contract, TMS provided a second set of "estimated shipping charges" for each bidder. After reviewing this list, the contracting officer once again determined that Braceland Brothers was the low bidder, and that CPC was the second lowest-priced bidder. On December 11, the agency awarded the contract to Braceland Brothers. On December 6 and 11, CPC filed a second agency-level protest which set forth a pricing "breakdown of the shipments on a per destination basis" and requested additional details from the agency regarding its pricing evaluation.