Piedmont Propulsion Systems, LLC

B-410914.2 Mar 17, 2015 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Piedmont Propulsion Systems, LLC, of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, protests the issuance by the Department of the Navy, Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), of a notice of its intent to award a sole-source contract to Rolls-Royce Corporation for performance-based logistics to support the United States Marine Corps' (USMC) KC-130J aircraft propulsion systems. Piedmont challenges the propriety of the proposed sole-source award, arguing that the justification lacks a reasonable basis and reflects a lack of reasonable advanced procurement planning by the agency. We deny the protest. 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: Piedmont Propulsion Systems, LLC File: B-410914.2 Date: March 17, 2015 Darwin A. Hindman III, Esq., and Joshua Mullen, Esq., Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, for the protester. Scott E. Pickens, Esq., Barnes & Thornburg LLP, for Rolls-Royce Corporation, an intervenor. Thomas J. Florip, Esq., Thomas P. Fort, Esq., Bridget A. Jarvis, Esq., and James B. Travis, Esq. Department of the Navy, for the agency. Charles W. Morrow, Esq., and Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest of a proposed sole-source contract, which the agency justifies on the basis that only one responsible source will satisfy the requirement without unacceptable delay, is denied where the record reasonably supports the agency’s justification, and there is no basis to conclude that the use of noncompetitive procedures was caused by the agency’s lack of reasonable advance procurement planning. DECISION Piedmont Propulsion Systems, LLC, of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, protests the issuance by the Department of the Navy, Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), of a notice of its intent to award a sole-source contract to Rolls-Royce Corporation for performance-based logistics to support the United States Marine Corps’ (USMC) KC-130J aircraft propulsion systems. Piedmont challenges the propriety of the proposed sole-source award, arguing that the justification lacks a reasonable basis and reflects a lack of reasonable advanced procurement planning by the agency. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The KC-130J aircraft is a medium-sized, four-engine, turboprop aircraft utilized by the USMC to support various critical assault missions. The aircraft has been modified to perform various refueling tasks, such as air-to-air refueling, air-delivered ground refueling, offensive air support, and other assault support. The aircraft’s propulsion system consists of various parts including, as relevant here, an AE2100D3 turboprop engine and an R391 propeller. Rolls-Royce is the original equipment manufacturer for the engine and GE Dowty is the original equipment manufacturer for the propeller. At this time, neither manufacturer has provided NAVAIR with unrestricted rights to technical data for these components. See Agency Report (AR) at 6-8. Since 2002, NAVAIR has acquired maintenance services for the KC-130J propulsion system under a sole-source contract with Rolls-Royce; Rolls-Royce, has subcontracted maintenance of the R391 propeller with GE Dowty. Id. at 6. The KC-130J propulsion system requirement includes commercial depot level support; technical publications; program management; configuration management; field service support; technical data management; engine Weapons Replaceable Assembly (WRA) and component repair; supply support; and WRA and component packaging. Id. at 5. Prior Sole-Source Award and March 2014 Protest In September 2012, NAVAIR executed a justification and approval (J&A) authorizing issuance of a sole-source contract with Rolls-Royce, based on the authority in the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA), 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), which permits the use of other than full and open competition, where only one responsible source can satisfy an agency’s requirements. See AR, Tab 6, J&A, at 1. The J&A anticipated the award of a contract, for a base year and four 1-year options, to provide maintenance of AE2100D3 engines and R391 propellers; procurement of engine spares; and logistics and engineering support. Id. As relevant here, the J&A under “Actions to Remove Barriers to Future Competition,” stated that it would not be feasible for another source to “acquire the extensive technical, manufacturing and procurement capabilities necessary to perform this effort.” Id. The J&A also stated that the government lacked adequate technical data and technical rights to award a competitive procurement. Id. at 2.