The Bridge General Trading & Contracting Company

B-417085.2,B-417085.4,B-417085.5 Jul 24, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The Bridge General Trading & Contracting Company (The Bridge Company), located in Kuwait City, Kuwait, protests the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract to Al Qabandi United Company W.L.L. (Al Qabandi), located in Salmiya, Kuwait, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA5703-18-R-0010, issued by Department of the Air Force, for the lease of non-tactical vehicles. The Bridge Company challenges the Air Force's evaluation of the protester's and awardee's proposals. The protester also alleges that the awardee and several other offerors have engaged in collusive bidding. We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. View Decision Decision Matter of: The Bridge General Trading & Contracting Company File: B-417085.2; B-417085.4; B-417085.5 Date: July 24, 2019 Fouad Rouh for the protester. Christopher S. Cole, Esq., and Alexis J. Bernstein, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Elizabeth Witwer, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging the agency's evaluation of the awardee's proposal is denied where the record reflects that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest alleging that the agency erred by not evaluating the protester's proposal is dismissed where the solicitation provided for the evaluation of the three lowest-priced proposals in a procurement conducted using a lowest-priced, technically acceptable evaluation scheme, and where the protester's proposal was not one of the three lowest-priced proposals. 3. Protester challenging the agency's methodology for calculating offerors' total prices is dismissed as an untimely challenge to the terms of the solicitation. 4. Protest alleging that the awardee and other offerors engaged in collusive bidding is dismissed as a matter that is not within the purview of our Office. DECISION The Bridge General Trading & Contracting Company (The Bridge Company), located in Kuwait City, Kuwait, protests the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract to Al Qabandi United Company W.L.L. (Al Qabandi), located in Salmiya, Kuwait, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA5703-18-R-0010, issued by Department of the Air Force, for the lease of non-tactical vehicles. The Bridge Company challenges the Air Force's evaluation of the protester's and awardee's proposals. The protester also alleges that the awardee and several other offerors have engaged in collusive bidding.1 We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. BACKGROUND On October 5, 2018, the Air Force's 386 Expeditionary Contracting Squadron issued the RFP, which contemplated the award of a single fixed-price IDIQ contract with a 5-year ordering period. RFP at 1, 63. The solicitation sought proposals for the lease of a variety of non-tactical vehicles at Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait. Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 14-15. The maximum value of the IDIQ was $8,295,000 Kuwaiti Dollars (KWD). RFP at 63. The RFP anticipated award to the offeror submitting the lowest-priced, technically acceptable (LPTA) proposal with an acceptable record of past performance. Id. at 72. In this respect, the solicitation provided for evaluation of three factors: technical capability, past performance, and price. Id. at 75. The technical capability factor consisted of five subfactors. Id. at 69. The RFP advised offerors that the technical capability factor (including its five subfactors) and the past performance factor would be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. Id. at 74. If any factor or subfactor was rated as unacceptable, the proposal would be deemed ineligible for award. Id. In further explaining the agency's evaluation methodology, the solicitation informed offerors that the Air Force would rank proposals by price, and then evaluate the lowest-priced proposals until the agency identified three proposals that were "technically acceptable with an acceptable past performance." Id. at 73. Proposals were due by January 19, 2019. Id. at 1. In response to the RFP, the Air Force received 67 proposals. Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 5. The record reflects that, before ranking proposals according to price, the Air Force first conducted a "responsiveness check," which examined whether the offeror submitted its proposal in accordance with the RFP's proposal submission instructions.2 Agency Report (AR), Tab 17, Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD), at 2; COS at 5. Any proposal that failed to comply with the instructions was deemed "non-responsive," and was excluded from the competition.3 Agency Resp. to GAO Third Request for Information (RFI), May 30, 2019, at 1.