Research Analysis & Maintenance, Inc.; Westar Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc.B-292587.7 November 17, 2003 [Note: This same information appears under multiple IDs: B-292587.7, B-292587.6, B-292587.5, B-292587.8, B-292587.4 Protest: Research Analysis & Maintenance, Inc. (RAM) and Westar Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc. (COBRO) protest the actions of the Threat Systems Management Office (TSMO TSMO Threat Systems Management Office TSMO Transnational Social Movement Organizations TSMO Threat Simulator Management Office TSMO Transportation Systems Management and Operations TSMO Thomassen Strategie voor Mens en Organisatie ), Department of the Army, in conducting the procurement and making award to Northrop Grumman Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) is an aerospace and defense conglomerate that is the result of the 1994 purchase of Grumman by Northrop. The company is the third largest defense contractor for the U.S. Technical Services, Inc. (NGTS NGTS Next Generation Threat System (aircrew training devices) NGTS New Generation Trading System (Shanghai Stock Exchange) NGTS Next Generation Test System (Hekimian) ) under request for proposals (RFP (Request For Proposal) A document that invites a vendor to submit a bid for hardware, software and/or services. It may provide a general or very detailed specification of the system. 1. (business) RFP - Request for Proposal. 2. ) No. DABK39-03-R-0007, for maintenance and operation of foreign threat systems. RAM and COBRO challenge a number of aspects of the procurement, including the terms of the reopening of discussions after prior protests by RAM and COBRO, the evaluation of potential organizational conflicts of interest (OCI), and the evaluation of revised proposals leading to reaffirmation of the prior award to NGTS. Decision: We sustain RAM's protest and deny COBRO's protest Decision Summary: Protest is sustained where, based on a reasonable interpretation of agency's stated expectations in the solicitation with respect to the desired staffing approach, protester, the incumbent contractor, was misled into proposing a staffing approach--involving a significant reduction in core staffing from the historical staffing, reliance on extensive cross-training, and use of surge staffing to perform a significant portion of the operational requirement--that the agency viewed as essentially unacceptable. |
|
||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion