Africa Automotive Distribution Services, Ltd. (W56HZV-19-R-0079)

B-418246.6 Aug 24, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Africa Automotive Distribution Services, Ltd., of Gibraltar, United Kingdom, protests the award of a contract to US21, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W56HZV-19-R-0079, issued by the Department of the Army for the provision of commercial heavy duty vehicles. After the agency completed corrective action in response to a prior protest, the protester now challenges the agency's reevaluation of the offerors' estimated transportation costs. We sustain 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:  Africa Automotive Distribution Services, Ltd. File:  B-418246.6 Date:  August 24, 2021 John R. Prairie, Esq., Cara L. Lasley, Esq., and Adam R. Briscoe, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for the protester. Christopher R. Shiplett, Esq., Randolph Law, PLLC, for US21, Inc., the intervenor. Debra J. Talley, Esq., and Sean Daigle, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Kasia Dourney, Esq., and Evan C. Williams, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s reevaluation--after corrective action in response to an earlier protest--of transportation costs, which were used to assess the total evaluated price, is sustained where the record shows that the reevaluation was inconsistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Africa Automotive Distribution Services, Ltd., of Gibraltar, United Kingdom, protests the award of a contract to US21, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W56HZV-19-R-0079, issued by the Department of the Army for the provision of commercial heavy duty vehicles.  After the agency completed corrective action in response to a prior protest, the protester now challenges the agency’s reevaluation of the offerors’ estimated transportation costs. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND On August 8, 2019, the Army issued the RFP, seeking proposals for eight variants of these vehicles, including flatbed trucks, personnel carriers, water trucks, fuel trucks, and spare parts for all variants.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, RFP at 3. The procurement was conducted under the Foreign Military Sales program, using the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, Contracting by Negotiation.[1]Id.  The solicitation stated that the vehicles and spare parts were to be provided F.O.B. [free on board] origin to Somalia and Iraq.[2]  Id.; AR, Tab 9, RFP amend. 5 at 2.  The solicitation anticipated award of a single fixed-price 3-year requirements contract, on a lowest-priced, technically acceptable (LPTA) basis, considering technical and price evaluation factors.  RFP at 3.  This protest centers on the agency’s evaluation of the offerors’ estimated transportation costs for delivery of these vehicles and spare parts to Somalia and Iraq.  As relevant here, offerors were instructed to submit a completed pricing spreadsheet, proposing prices for all of the vehicles and spare parts.  RFP § L.4.2.3.  The solicitation provided that the agency would evaluate the reasonableness and balance of offerors’ prices.  AR, Tab 9, RFP amend. 5 § M.4.2.[3] The RFP stated that the Army would calculate the total evaluated price by adding: (a) the proposed prices for all CLINs [contract line item numbers] . . . ; [and] (b) the transportation costs determined by the ACC-WRN [Army Contracting Command--Warren] Transportation Office for all the FOB Origin CLINs. . . . RFP § M.4.2.1.  The solicitation also established that the “[g]overnment will apply the lowest evaluated transportation cost for the offerors proposed shipping characteristics to the proposed price.”  Id. § M.5.1.2.   Of particular importance, to evaluate the estimated transportation costs, the agency was to “use the lowest freight rates from the [t]ransportation [o]fficer” that were “in effect” and “on file or published” in calculating the costs for transportation of vehicles and spare parts to Somalia and Iraq.  Id. § M.5, M.5.1.  The RFP further provided that in the event there were no rates on file for the government’s selected method of shipment: the ACC-WRN Transportation office shall request the lowest cost shipping method and price from United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM).  Rates may include, but not be limited to, cargo moving under "One-Time-Only" contracts, Sea-Air Multi-modal contracts, Special Assignment Airlift Missions or Direct Bookings. Id.