Israel Aerospace Industries

B-417681 Aug 16, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), of Ben Gurion International Airport 70100, Israel, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. W58RGZ-19-R-0198, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, for helicopter maintenance and overhaul services. IAI alleges that the RFP's terms are unduly restrictive of competition. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  Israel Aerospace Industries File:  B-417681 Date:  August 16, 2019 Howard J. Stanislawski, Esq., Patrick K. O’Keefe, Esq., and Robin Wright Cleary, Esq., Sidley Austin LLP, for the protester. Marcia G. Madsen, Esq., and David F. Dowd, Esq., Mayer Brown LLP, for Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, the intervenor. Jonathan A. Hardage, Esq., and Matthew A. McNease, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest allegation that the solicitation contained an unduly restrictive provision is denied where the agency explained that the provision was reasonably necessary to meet its needs. DECISION Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), of Ben Gurion International Airport 70100, Israel, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. W58RGZ‑19‑R‑0198, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, for helicopter maintenance and overhaul services.  IAI alleges that the RFP’s terms are unduly restrictive of competition. We deny the protest BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on April 5, 2019, contemplated the award of a fixed-price indefinite‑delivery, indefinite-quantity contract to be performed over a 1-year base period and four 1‑year option periods.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 7, RFP at 2-3.  The work to be performed involves the maintenance and overhaul of the UH-60 Main Rotor Blade Assembly.  Id. at 19.  The solicitation specified that, in addition to providing the maintenance and overhaul services, the selected contractor was expected to provide all necessary parts to overhaul the main rotor blades because the agency would not provide any government‑furnished material (GFM) other than repairable assets and reusable containers.  Id. at 3, 19.  Significantly, the overhaul and repair must satisfy critical characteristics because the main rotor blades are a critical safety item, meaning that failure of the main rotor blades could lead to catastrophic failure resulting in the loss of life.  Id. at 19; Combined Contracting Officer’s Statement/Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 7. On February 8, 2019, the agency limited the competition to approved sources under Federal Acquisition Regulation § 6.302-1(a)(2).  COS/MOL at 2.  The Justification and Approval for Other Than Full and Open Competition (J&A) listed Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) and another firm as approved sources.  AR, Tab 5, J&A at 3, 5.  IAI was approved as a source on February 19, 2019.  COS/MOL at 2.  According to the agency, the source approval process does not address logistics related information, including whether a source is actually able to acquire the required parts.  Id. at 3, n.1.  Sikorsky is the original equipment manufacturer of the UH-60 and the main rotor blades.  Protest at 3.  Sikorsky is the only supplier for some of the necessary parts required for overhaul.  AR, Tab 11, Email from IAI to Agency at 1.  During the solicitation period, IAI notified the agency that Sikorsky was unwilling to sell it the necessary parts, and requested that the agency provide the parts as GFM.  AR, Tab 10, Army Response to IAI Email at 2.  The agency declined to amend the solicitation because it concluded that it was not in a position to provide the parts as GFM.  Id. at 1-2.  Prior to the close of the solicitation period on June 17, 2019, the protester filed the instant protest with our Office. DISCUSSION The protester argues that the solicitation’s requirement that the selected contractor must provide all of the parts and equipment is unduly restrictive in light of Sikorsky’s unwillingness to enter into agreements to supply the parts to other offerors.  Protest at 7.  IAI further argues that the agency conducted a de facto sole-source procurement because the agency is aware that only Sikorsky can provide the parts and therefore perform the contract.  Protester’s Comments at 3, 8. In preparing a solicitation, a contracting agency must solicit offers in a manner designed to achieve full and open competition, and include restrictive provisions only to the extent necessary to satisfy the agency’s minimum needs.  10 U.S.C.