Global Communications Solutions, Inc., B-291113, November 15, 2002

B-291113 Nov 15, 2002 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Is not for work to be assigned based on further competitions among the awardees. In determining the awardees of certain line items was unreasonable where the solicitation unambiguously stated that awards were to be made on the basis of 10-year pricing. The principal commodity purchased under this contract is satellite airtime. The CLINs were to add new INMARSAT services and to replace existing INMARSAT services. Were of comparatively equal importance. Were both more important than the third evaluation factor. Section M.4.2.b specified that: (2) The Offeror is required to submit all pricing data in the format indicated in Sections B and L. Offerors are required to submit their proposed prices for the entire 120-month period as set forth in Section B. . . . . . (5) The price evaluation will be based on the lowest total discounted life cycle cost (DLCC) for each proposal. View Decision Global Communications Solutions, Inc., B-291113, November 15, 2002 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Global Communications Solutions, Inc. protests the awards of certain contract line item numbers (CLIN) to AOS, Inc. for International Maritime Satellite (INMARSAT) services under a multiple-award, delivery-order contract awarded by the Defense Information Systems Contracting Organization (DITCO), Defense Information Systems Agency pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. DCA200-01-R-5029. We sustain the protest. The INMARSAT contract provides satellite-based mobile telecommunications services and equipment for the Department of Defense and other branches of the federal government. The principal commodity purchased under this contract is satellite airtime. The RFP anticipated awarding multiple, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contracts utilizing fixed-price and time-and-material type delivery orders for a 3-year base period with seven 1-year options. RFP Sec. L.3. To this end, the RFP (at section B) required that proposals include prices for all CLINs and sub-line item numbers (SLIN) for each year of the 10 years (120 months) covered by the solicitation. RFP Sec. L.10, Part III. The CLINs were to add new INMARSAT services and to replace existing INMARSAT services. The RFP stated a minimum guaranteed dollar value for each contract of $10,000. RFP Sec. H.2.b. The RFP stated that two of the evaluation factors, cost/price and past performance/corporate capability, were of comparatively equal importance, and were both more important than the third evaluation factor, technical/management approach. RFP Sec. M.4.1. With respect to the conduct of the price evaluation, Section M.4.2.b specified that: (2) The Offeror is required to submit all pricing data in the format indicated in Sections B and L. Offerors are required to submit their proposed prices for the entire 120-month period as set forth in Section B. . . . . . (5) The price evaluation will be based on the lowest total discounted life cycle cost (DLCC) for each proposal. The DLCC will be determined based on the proposed prices and quantities listed in Section B (including options) over a 120-month service period. Although the evaluation period will be 120 months of service, this should not be construed to mean that all option years will be exercised. . . . Section G.6 of the RFP, entitled "AWARD OF EXISTING INMARSAT SERVICES," stated: /1/ Upon award of this solicitation, all existing INMARSAT air-time services administered by DITCO, whether on [delivery orders] or contracts, will be re-awarded to the winning Contractor or Contractors. Award will be based on a comparison of all awardee's contract prices. Selection will be based upon low price. Amendment Number 3 of the RFP, issued on December 14, 2001, clarified that awards under the RFP would be made on the CLIN, not the SLIN, level. On June 6, 2002, five contract awards were made. GCS and AOS were among the awardees. There were meetings with the awardees, including GCS, in late July. During a July 24 meeting, the agency indicated that it was contemplating issuing delivery orders to make awards of the CLINs for existing INMARSAT services on the basis of comparing the awardees' pricing for the 3-year base period. On July 25, GCS protested this interpretation to DITCO, arguing that the solicitation contemplated that the 10-year pricing would be considered in making the awards for these CLINs. On August 1, GCS received a letter from DITCO in which it was informed that the awards were "recalculated" and that it would no longer receive the award of any line items for existing INMARSAT services. The agency, in the same letter, went on to state: The original awards were based upon your company's total price at the CLIN level for the first base year. The awards were re-calculated to reflect your company's total prices for all three base years.