B-298954; B-298954.2; B-298954.3, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, January 12, 2007

B-298954; B-298954.2; B-298954.3, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, January 12, 2007 TITLE: B-298954; B-298954.2; B-298954.3, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, January 12, 2007 BNUMBER: B-298954; B-298954.2; B-298954.3 DATE: January 12, 2007 **************************************************************************************** B-298954; B-298954.2; B-298954.3, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, January 12, 2007 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: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation File: B-298954; B-298954.2; B-298954.3 Date: January 12, 2007 Richard A. Sauber, Esq., Deneen J. Melander, Esq., Steven A. Alerding, Esq., Seth W. Greene, Esq., and Joseph J. LoBue, Esq., Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, for the protester. Marcia G. Madsen, Esq., David F. Dowd, Esq., Michael E. Lackey, Esq., David B. Robbins, Esq., and William L. Olsen, Esq., Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw, for Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors--Syracuse, the intervenor. Brian Toland, Esq., John J. Reynolds, Esq., Howard J. Bookman, Esq., and Johanna E. Crawford, Esq.,Department of the Army, for the agency. David A. Ashen, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency failed to adequately account in the evaluation and best value determination for protester's offer of an enhancement (greater coverage) to required target acquisition counter fire radar is denied where the agency assigned a significant strength to protester's proposal on account of the proposed enhancement, but also assigned a significant strength to the awardee's proposal on account of the fact that its proposed radar was based on an actual prototype radar, and thus was more likely than the protester's unbuilt design to meet the solicitation's stringent delivery schedule; having reasonably determined that the protester's proposal was not superior to the awardee's proposal with respect to technical approach, the agency reasonably concluded that the awardee's advantages with respect to supportability and a lower cost/price warranted finding that the proposal represented the best value. DECISION Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation (NG) protests the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command's (CECOM) award of a contract to Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors--Syracuse (LM), under request for proposals (RFP) No. W15P7T-06-R-T001, for the Enhanced AN/TPQ-36 (EQ-36) Target Acquisition Counter Fire Radar System. NG asserts that LM's proposal failed to satisfy a mandatory solicitation requirement and otherwise challenges the evaluation of proposals. We deny the protest. Target acquisition counter fire radar detects and analyzes incoming enemy mortar shells, rockets, and artillery (cannon) shells so as to locate enemy firing points and thereby enable friendly forces to target the firing points. As stated in the Statement of Objectives (SOO) included in the solicitation, the EQ-36 procurement is in response to a requirement for quickly replacing the existing AN/TPQ-36(V) 8 radar system, which has the operational capability to locate hostile mortar, artillery, and rocket fire that are a pervasive threat throughout the Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) theaters of operation, with a system with improved capabilities. SOO sect. 1. According to the SOO, the EQ-36 system "shall provide increased capability over the existing AN/TPQ-36(V) 8, including 360 degree azimuth coverage against all threats at increased ranges." Id. sect. 1. Further, the EQ-36 "improves the current system's capability to operate in clutter and less than desired detection range and accuracy," addressing "a critical OIF/OEF warfighting deficiency to locate threat mortar, artillery and rocket systems in a clutter environment." Id. sect. 1.1.[1] In addition, the SOO noted that, not only did the current target acquisition counter fire radar systems have "limited radar system performance, [but] this near obsolescent equipment is expensive to support and adversely effects sustainment and maintainability costs." SOO sect. 1.1. Therefore, according to the SOO, "[s]chedule is a critical aspect of the EQ-36 program due to the urgent nature of the requirement," and "[g]iven the need to quickly field a system to meet ongoing requirements, technically mature solutions shall be procured to meet existing and emerging needs." SOO sections 1.4, 3.6.