Lucent Technologies World Services Inc., B-295462, March 2, 2005

B-295462 Mar 02, 2005 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Lucent Technologies World Services Inc. protests its exclusion from participation in the competition under request for proposals (RFP) No. W914NS-05-R-9003, issued by the Department of the Army for Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) devices for use in the agency's Advanced First Responder's Network (AFRN) in Iraq. We deny the protest. View Decision B-295462, Lucent Technologies World Services Inc., March 2, 2005 Decision Matter of: Lucent Technologies World Services Inc. File: B-295462 Date: March 2, 2005 Kelley P. Doran, Esq., William A. Shook, Esq., G. Matthew Koehl, Esq., and Mark E. DeWitt, Esq., Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds, LLP, for the protester. David S. Cohen, Esq., John J. O'Brien, Esq., and Rowena Laxa, Esq., Cohen Mohr, LLP, for Sepura Ltd., an intervenor. Raymond M. Saunders, Esq., Maj. Frank A. March, and Maj. Gregory R. Bockin, Department of the Army, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency's exclusion of an offeror from participation in a procurement is denied where the agency reasonably determined that the protester has an organizational conflict of interest arising from its preparation of technical specifications used by the agency in the solicitation. DECISION Lucent Technologies World Services Inc. protests its exclusion from participation in the competition under request for proposals (RFP) No. W914NS-05-R-9003, issued by the Department of the Army for Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) devices for use in the agency's Advanced First Responder's Network (AFRN) in Iraq. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP anticipated the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for TETRA devices, which consist of wireless radios and ancillary equipment that incorporate the TETRA communications standards used by emergency first responder personnel. Lucent is the design/build contractor for the agency's Iraq Reconstruction Communication Sector (IRCS) contract, which requires "complete design-build services and procurement for communications design, construction, demolition, and rehabilitation services." Protest at 3. Task Order 2 of the IRCS contract required Lucent to validate conceptual designs for the AFRN, assess existing communications infrastructure, and design the Phase I AFRN systems and architecture "using an approach that will allow the earliest delivery of a fully functioning nationwide integrated, secure, network." Agency Report (AR), Tab 10, IRCS Task Order 2, at 3. IRCS Task Order 2 also required Lucent to prepare a cost/benefit analysis of potential technologies for use in AFRN. See Protester's Comments, Exh. 3, E-mail from Agency to Lucent Regarding Task Order 2 (May 23, 2004). Lucent considered TETRA and two other potential alternative communications technologies for use in the AFRN, and solicited price and technical quotes from vendors. Protester's Comments at 5. Lucent also consulted the published standards for TETRA technology. Id. In its cost/benefit analysis of the competing technology standards, Lucent recommended that the TETRA technology be adopted for the AFRN. Protester's Comments at 7. The agency accepted Lucent's recommendation and IRCS Task Order 2 was subsequently modified to require Lucent to develop a solicitation for the procurement of the TETRA devices. Protester's Comments, Exh. 10, IRCS Task Order 2, Mod. 2, at 2-3. Lucent prepared "Schedule D -- Statement of Work," which set forth the technical specifications for the TETRA devices, and submitted it to the agency on July 22, 2004. AR, Tab 18. The agency issued the initial RFP on October 26, 2004. An agency technical representative stated that he prepared the initial RFP requirements based on technical specifications found on computer files residing on the agency's local area network. Agency Technical Representative Decl., Jan. 3, 2005, at 1. These specifications were less detailed than those in Lucent's Schedule D, and the parties agree that these specifications were not supplied by Lucent or based on Lucent specifications. The agency received questions from offerors regarding the TETRA device specifications in the initial RFP, including one from Sepura Ltd. that observed that the RFP "device specifications" appeared to have been based on a specific Motorola design, and asked whether the procurement was restricted to Motorola specifications. AR, Tab 17, E-Mail from Sepura to Agency Technical Representative (Oct. 29, 2004). Following these questions, the agency suspended the RFP. The agency asked Lucent to assist in responding to the offerors' questions and ensuring that the technical specifications in the initial RFP were appropriate for use in the AFRN.