Lockheed Martin Corporation

B-411365.2 Aug 26, 2015 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Lockheed Martin Corporation, of Colorado Springs, Colorado, protests the award of a contract to Raytheon Technical Services Company, LLC, of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8723-14-R-0002, issued by the Department of the Air Force for operations and support for warning and attack assessment of air, missile and space threats under the North American Aerospace Defense Command Cheyenne Mountain Complex-Integrated Tactical Warning/Attack Assessment and (NCMC-ITW/AA) Space Support Contract (NISSC). Lockheed argues that the agency's evaluation of offerors' proposals, including its conduct of discussions and the resulting award decision, were improper. 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:  Lockheed Martin Corporation File:  B-411365.2 Date:  August 26, 2015 Michael F. Mason, Esq., Brendan M. Lill, Esq., C. Peter Dungan, Esq., Ogechi C. Achuko, Esq., Katherine L. Morga, Esq., Nicole D. Picard, Esq., and Marta Anne Thompson, Esq., Hogan Lovells US LLP, and Maryann P. Surrick, Esq., Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the protester. Kara L. Daniels, Esq., Mark D. Colley, Esq., Dominique Casimir, Esq., Brandon Bodnar, Esq., Stuart Turner, Esq., and Victoria Killion, Esq., Arnold & Porter LLP, for the intervenor. Michael G. McCormack, Esq., Sean Hannaway, Esq. and Lt. Col. Matthew J. Mulbarger, Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Gary R. Allen, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that agency failed to conduct meaningful discussions that treated offerors equally is denied where the agency led the offerors into the general areas of their proposals requiring amplification or revision, and tailored the discussions to concerns specific to each offeror’s technical proposal. 2.  Protest challenging an agency’s technical evaluation and best value determination is denied where the record demonstrates that the evaluations and tradeoff decision were reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 3.  Protest that an agency failed to enforce page limitation in evaluating the awardee’s proposal is denied where the protester’s proposal exceeded the page limit in the same way it alleged the awardee’s did; the requirement was similarly waived for all offerors; and the protester has shown no reasonable possibility of prejudice. ___________________________________________________________ DECISION Lockheed Martin Corporation, of Colorado Springs, Colorado, protests the award of a contract to Raytheon Technical Services Company, LLC, of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8723-14-R-0002, issued by the Department of the Air Force for operations and support for warning and attack assessment of air, missile and space threats under the North American Aerospace Defense Command Cheyenne Mountain Complex–Integrated Tactical Warning/Attack Assessment and (NCMC-ITW/AA) Space Support Contract (NISSC).[1]  Lockheed argues that the agency’s evaluation of offerors’ proposals, including its conduct of discussions and the resulting award decision, were improper. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on March 5, 2014, contemplated award of a single indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract with a ceiling price of $700 million, and described seven initial task and delivery orders that might be issued, in addition to other task or delivery orders that could be issued throughout a base year and four option years.[2]  RFP, § L, at 10.  In general terms, the contractor was to provide services to support the NCMC-ITW/AA and Space Support Contract-covered systems.  Id., § M, at 5.  The contractor was also to provide for ongoing sustainment, technology refresh work, and operations and support for specific NCMC-ITW/AA and legacy space systems.  Id. The RFP established that contract award was to be made on a best value basis, with an integrated assessment of the following three evaluation factors, in descending order of importance:  technical; past performance; and cost/price.  RFP, § M, at 7.  The technical factor was to be evaluated under the following three equally-important subfactors:  sustainment activities; systems engineering/projects; and small business participation.  The sustainment activities technical subfactor contained eight focus areas, each of which was evaluated.  As relevant here, one of these areas was operations, maintenance, and support.  Under this focus area, the agency was to evaluate an offeror’s approach and understanding of the requirements for providing operations, maintenance, and support services to meet the requirements i...