General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc.

Case: B-416181 Agency: Protester: General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc. Date: 2018-07-02 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-416181 Jul 02, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc. (GDMS), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the rejection of its proposal under request for proposals (RFP) No. W56KGY-17-R-0026, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command--Aberdeen Proving Ground, for a computer hardware/software solution for the Army's Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS-A). GDMS challenges the evaluation of its product demonstration and technical proposal. 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:  General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc. File:  B-416181 Date:  July 2, 2018 Carla J. Weiss, Esq., D. Joe Smith, Esq., Grant Schweikert, Esq., and Joshua A. Violanti, Esq., Jenner & Block LLP, for the protester. Jeffery M. Chiow, Esq., and Mark J. Linderman, Esq., Rogers Joseph O'Donnell, PC, for Raytheon Co. Intelligence and Information Systems; Anuj Vohra, Esq., and Hart W. Wood, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for Palantir Technologies, Inc., the intervenors. Debra J. Talley, Esq., and David A. Balaban, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Pedro E. Briones, Esq., Noah B. Bleicher, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest of the agency's technical evaluation is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria. DECISION General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc. (GDMS), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the rejection of its proposal under request for proposals (RFP) No. W56KGY-17-R-0026, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command--Aberdeen Proving Ground, for a computer hardware/software solution for the Army's Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS-A).[1]  GDMS challenges the evaluation of its product demonstration and technical proposal. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND Distributed Common Ground System-Army The solicitation describes DCGS-A as a "system of systems" comprised of:  an extensive intelligence architecture that enables distributed processing and information sharing of data from sensors and other sources across the globe; software tools to help users analyze, update, and share intelligence products; servers that store data and intelligence; and a set of common standards that enable integration of new technology and processes.  See Agency Report (AR), Tab 10, RFP attach 3, Performance Requirements Document (PRD), at 6; see, e.g., Palantir USG, Inc., B-412746, May 18, 2016, 2016 CPD ¶ 138 at 2.[2]  The Test and Quality Division Chief for DCGS-A (hereinafter, division chief) explains that DCGS-A is primarily a software solution, with hardware components and over 100 software applications that aid the user in processing intelligence from something as simple as a weather feed, to more complex data such as full-motion video from drones.  Hearing Transcript (Tr.) at 19:23-20:16.[3] According to the statement of work (SOW), the instant procurement, DCGS-A Capability Drop 1 (CD-1), seeks a combined, commercial hardware/software solution to enhance DCSG-A capabilities to meet the interoperability, security, training, usability, and data management capabilities at the battalion level.[4]  SOW at 4.  CD-1, known as the "battalion solution," also requires related support services and various deliverables, including product documentation (such as user manuals), software licensing agreements, monthly security patches/updates, and information assurance and cybersecurity controls, among other things.  Id. at 4, 11, 18-20.  The RFP states that the goal is to establish commercial item solutions that will satisfy the requirements specified in the solicitation's performance requirements and other documents referenced in the SOW.  Id.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...