Thumbnails Document Outline
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=1>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=2>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=3>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=4>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=5>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=6>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=7>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=8>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=9>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=10>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=11>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=12>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=13>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=14>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=15>
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=16>
No Outline Available
Find:
Previous
Next
Highlight all Match case
Toggle Slider
Find
Previous
Next
Page: of 16
Presentation Mode Open Print Download Current View
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,792>
Zoom Out
Zoom In

United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
Comptroller General
of the United States
Decision
Matter of:
CH2M Hill Antarctic Support, Inc.
File:
B
-
406325; B
-
406325.2; B
-
406325.3
Date:
April 18, 2012
Timothy E. Heffernan, Esq., Nicholas A. Merrell, Esq., and Steven
L.
Lunsford,
Esq., Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzg
erald, LLP,
for the protester.
Marcia G. Madsen, Esq., David F. Dowd, Esq., Polly A. Myers, Esq.,
Cameron S.
Hamrick, Esq., Luke Levasseur, Esq., and Phillip R. Dupré, Esq., Mayer
Brown LLP,
for Lockheed Martin Information Systems & Global Solutions,
the i
ntervenor.
Benjamin I. Klein, Esq.,
National Science Foundation, for the agency.
Jonathan
L.
Kang,
Esq., and James
A.
Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
1. Protest challenging th
e assignment of an evaluation rating for the protester’s
technical proposa
l is denied where the rating was reasonable
and
consistent with
the terms of the
solicitation.
2. Exchanges with the awardee were clarifications, and not discussions,
where the
age
ncy requested that the awardee confirm a mistake that was apparent from the
face of the proposal.
3.
Protest challenging the a
gency
’s
conclusion that the advantages in the
awardee’s technical proposal merited selection of its higher
-
cost proposal
is deni
ed
where the award decision
was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the
solicitation.
DECISION
CH2M Hill Antarctic Support, Inc.
, of
Englewood, Colorado
, protests the award of a
contract to
Lockheed Martin Information Systems & Global Solutions
, o
f
Gaithersburg
, Maryland
, under request for proposals (RFP) No.
DACS08P2215
,
issued by the
National Science Foundation
(NSF)
, for
support of the United States
Antarctic Program (USAP)
. The protester
argues that the agency’s evaluation of its
technical pro
posal was unreasonable, that the agency conducted unequal
discussions with the awardee, and that the selection decision was flawed.
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.
Page
2
B
-
406325
et al.
We
deny
the protest.
BACKGROUND
The RFP was issued on October 10, 20
08
, and sought proposals to provide
integrated operat
ions and science support services for the
USAP
. The contractor
will provide
support
in
five functional areas: (1) technical management and
administration; (2) science and technical project services; (3)
information technology
and communications; (4) infr
astructure, operations and professional services; and
(5) transportation and logistics. RFP at 31.
1
The RFP anticipated award of a contract with fixed
-
price, cost
-
reimbursement, and
cost
-
plus
-
fixed
-
fee line items
, with a maximum term of 13
1/2 years, con
sisting of a
transition period of
6
months,
a base period of 4 1/2
years, and four option periods
totaling
8 1/2
years. The RFP advised offerors that proposals would be evaluated
on the basis
the following factors, listed in descending order of importance
:
(1)
technical, (2) past performance,
(3) cost
/price
,
and (
4
) extent of participation of
small disadvantaged business concerns. RFP § M.2.1. The technical factor
had
three subfactors, listed in descending order of importance: (1) management
approach,
(2) technical
approach, and (3) transition.
RFP
§ M.6.1. For purposes of
award, the RFP stated that the technical factor was “significantly more
important
than the Past Performance, Cost/Price and Extent of Participation of Small
Disadvantaged Business C
oncerns Factors,” and that the non
-
cost evaluation
factors, when combined, were “significantly more important” than cost
/price
. RFP
§
M.2.2.
NSF received proposals from seven offerors, including
CH2M Hill
and Lockheed, by
the initial closing date of Feb
ruary 23, 2009. Following the evaluation of the
offerors’ initial proposals, the agency established a competitive range
consisting of
the proposals of
CH2M Hill
, Lockheed, and a third offeror. Agency Report (AR),
Tab 19
-
05, Source Selection Decision (SSD
), at 3. The agency conducted three
rounds of discussions with
the
offerors.
T
he agency received final revised
proposals from offerors on October 25, 2011. As discussed in detail below,
NSF
asked Lockheed on December 2 to clarify what the agency
charact
erized
as a
mistake in its cost proposal.
Id.
at 7. Lockheed responded to the request on
December 5, confirming that the agency’s understanding of its proposed
cost was
correct.
Id.
1
The agency repor
t included a “conformed copy” of the RFP
,
which incorporated
the 18 amendments to the solicitation. All citations to the RFP in this
decision are to
the conformed version, unless noted otherwise.
<http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590558.pdf#page=2&zoom=100,0,139>
More Information Less Information
Close