LCE Newport Beach, Inc. (N0003924R4000)

B-422707 Jul 30, 2024 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights LCE Newport Beach, Inc., of Las Vegas, Nevada, protests the award of contracts to Data Link Solutions (DLS) and L3Harris (L3), under request for proposals (RFP) No. N0003924R4000, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Information Warfare Systems Command (Navy), for Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) terminals and related services. The protester raises a number of challenges to the terms of the solicitation as well as the agency's award selection. We dismiss the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: LCE Newport Beach, Inc. File: B-422707 Date: July 30, 2024 Dennis Matthews, for the protester. Mai Oanh Ho, Esq., Robert J. McCarthy III, Esq., and Erin L. Hernandez, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Kyle E. Gilbertson, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency's evaluation criteria and set-aside decision are dismissed as untimely, and the remaining allegations fail to state a legally sufficient basis of protest. DECISION LCE Newport Beach, Inc., of Las Vegas, Nevada, protests the award of contracts to Data Link Solutions (DLS) and L3Harris (L3), under request for proposals (RFP) No. N0003924R4000, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Information Warfare Systems Command (Navy), for Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) terminals and related services. The protester raises a number of challenges to the terms of the solicitation as well as the agency's award selection. We dismiss the protest. BACKGROUND On December 14, 2023, the Navy issued the solicitation on an unrestricted basis, seeking proposals for development, production, sustainment, and systems engineering and integration of the MIDS JTRS. Req. for Dismissal, exh. 1 (RFP) at 1, 4-6. The solicitation anticipated award of one or more indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts. Award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, using a two-step evaluation process. Id. at 81. At the initial step, the agency would evaluate proposals for compliance with “mandatory gate criteria,” on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. Id. Offerors receiving an acceptable rating under the mandatory gate criteria would proceed to the next step, where proposals would be evaluated, considering price and the following three non-price evaluation factors: integrated master schedule, past performance, and small business participation. Id. at 81-82. Proposals that received an unacceptable rating under the mandatory gate criteria were deemed “ineligible for award” and would not be considered further. Id. at 81. The solicitation established February 20, 2024, as the due date for proposals. Id. at 1. After the Navy's award of two indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts to DLS and L3, the agency provided LCE Newport Beach with a debriefing on June 26. Req. for Dismissal at 2. On June 30, LCE Newport Beach filed this post-award protest with our Office. DISCUSSION The protester raises a variety of allegations. Specifically, LCE Newport Beach makes the following arguments: (1) the solicitation's mandatory gateway evaluation criteria were “unfair and unreasonable”; (2) the agency improperly awarded contracts to two non-small businesses; (3) the debriefing contained improper redactions and did not “convey any meaningful discussion”; and (4) the protester questions “whether or not LCE Newport Beach was fairly treated and or can be considered a qualified supplier under what appears to be a ‘Lessor Qty' Provider.” Protest at 1-2. Before the due date for the submission of the agency report, the agency requested dismissal of LCE Newport Beach's protest on the grounds that it is untimely, as well as legally insufficient. Req. for Dismissal at 3-10. In its two responses to that dismissal request, the protester did not substantively dispute or respond to the agency's arguments. Resp. to Req. for Dismissal at 1-5; 2nd Resp. to Req. for Dismissal at 1-4. Instead, the protester simply asserts, among other things, that there is “no reason” to dismiss its protest, adding that the agency should have awarded the contract to LCE Newport Beach, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business, instead of two “big companies.” Resp. to Req. for Dismissal at 1. Challenges to the Solicitation LCE Newport Beach's first two protest grounds challenge the terms of the solicitation. In this regard, the protester argues that the solicitation's use of gateway criteria was “unfair and unreasonable,” and that the agency improperly awarded contracts to two non-small businesses. Protest at 1-2. Our Bid Protest Regulations contain strict rules for the timely submission of protests.