About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-411365.2 1 (2015-08-26)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadrob0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 




         G    A     O                                                   Comptroller General
       Accountabilty * Integrity * Reliability                           of the United States
United States Government Accountability Office          DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Washington, DC 20548                                 The decision issued on the date below was subject to
                                                     a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has
                                                     been approved for public release.
         D  e c i s i o n                           - .-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . ..


         Matter of:   Lockheed Martin Corporation

         File:        B-411365.2

         Date:        August 26, 2015

         Michael F. Mason, Esq., Brendan M. Lill, Esq., C. Peter Dungan, Esq., Ogechi C.
         Achuko, Esq., Katherine L. Morga, Esq., Nicole D. Picard, Esq., and Marta Anne
         Thompson, Esq., Hogan Lovells US LLP, and Maryann P. Surrick, Esq., Lockheed
         Martin Corporation, for the protester.
         Kara L. Daniels, Esq., Mark D. Colley, Esq., Dominique Casimir, Esq., Brandon
         Bodnar, Esq., Stuart Turner, Esq., and Victoria Killion, Esq., Arnold & Porter LLP,
         for the intervenor.
         Michael G. McCormack, Esq., Sean Hannaway, Esq. and Lt. Col. Matthew J.
         Mulbarger, Department of the Air Force, for the agency.
         Gary R. Allen, 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 that treated offerors
         equally is denied where the agency led the offerors into the general areas of their
         proposals requiring amplification or revision, and tailored the discussions to
         concerns specific to each offeror's technical proposal.

         2. Protest challenging an agency's technical evaluation and best value
         determination is denied where the record demonstrates that the evaluations and
         tradeoff decision were reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.

         3. Protest that an agency failed to enforce page limitation in evaluating the
         awardee's proposal is denied where the protester's proposal exceeded the page
         limit in the same way it alleged the awardee's did; the requirement was similarly
         waived for all offerors; and the protester has shown no reasonable possibility of
         prejudice.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most