Space Systems/Loral LLC

B-413131 Aug 22, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Space Systems/Loral LLC (SSL) of Palo Alto, California, protests the award of a contract to Aerojet Rocketdyne, Inc. (Aerojet) of Redmond, Washington, under request for proposals (RFP) No. NNC15ZCH014R, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for thruster and power processing unit development for an advanced electric propulsion system. SSL protests the agency's evaluation of its cost proposal, conduct of discussions, and source selection decision. 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:  Space Systems/Loral LLC File:  B-413131 Date:  August 22, 2016 David R. Johnson, Esq., Daniel P. Graham, Esq., Tyler E. Robinson, Esq., and Ryan D. Stalnaker, Esq., Vinson & Elkins LLP, for the protester. Richard J. McCarthy, Esq., MacAllister A. West, Esq., and Callista M. Puchmeyer, Esq., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, for the agency. Young H. Cho, 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 is denied where the agency led the offeror into the general area of its proposal requiring amplification or revision as acknowledged by the offeror in its final proposal revision. 2.  Protest challenging the agency’s cost evaluation and source selection decision is denied where the record of its evaluation and selection decision were reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Space Systems/Loral LLC (SSL) of Palo Alto, California, protests the award of a contract to Aerojet Rocketdyne, Inc. (Aerojet) of Redmond, Washington, under request for proposals (RFP) No. NNC15ZCH014R, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for thruster and power processing unit development for an advanced electric propulsion system.  SSL protests the agency’s evaluation of its cost proposal, conduct of discussions, and source selection decision.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND This procurement is for the demonstration of an advanced solar electric propulsion system that will enable future deep space human and robotic exploration applicable to the United States’ private and public sector space needs.  RFP[1] at 00248, 00250, 00370.[2]  The purpose of the contract, referred to as the advanced electric propulsion system (AEPS) contract, is the development and delivery of electric propulsion[3] string sets[4] to support a solar electric propulsion demonstration mission.  Id. at 00370.  During the contract’s base period of performance, the contractor will develop, test, and deliver engineering development end items that will reduce the risks associated with developing the flight end items.  Id.  During the option period of performance, if exercised, the contractor will develop, verify, and deliver the flight end items.  Id. The RFP, issued on July 24, 2015, under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, contemplated the award of a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with a performance fee incentive, with a base period and one option period, to be performed within a 36-month total period of performance.[5]  Id. at 00248, 00320, 00336.  Award was to be made on a best-value basis, considering the following evaluation factors:  mission suitability,[6] past performance, and cost.  Id. at 00326, 00352.  The solicitation stated that all evaluation factors were equal in importance; and noted that the non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than cost.  Id. at 00365.  In Section M, the RFP provided a very detailed description of the basis on which non-price factors would be evaluated under each subfactor.  Id. at 00353-00360.  As relevant here, the solicitation stated that under the mission suitability factor, technical approach subfactor, power processing unit (PPU) element (TA 1), the agency would evaluate the offeror’s proposed PPU technical approach, including its design solution, development method, and justification that the design solution meets the requirements in the SOW.[7]  Id.