GAO backs Textron FLRAA award over Lockheed Martin protest

Kenneth Patton, Managing Associate General Counsel for Procurement Law at GAO, issued a statement regarding today’s decision resolving the bid protest filed by Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, B-421359, B-421359.2: "On April 6, 2023, the U.S. Government Accountability Office denied a protest filed by Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation of Stratford, Connecticut. The protester challenged the award of the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, or FLRAA, Weapon System Development contract to Bell Textron Inc., of Fort Worth, Texas, under request for proposals No. W58RGZ-21-R-0084, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command-Redstone Arsenal. The FLRAA program seeks to produce new vertical lift aircraft to augment and ultimately replace the aging H-60 Black Hawk utility helicopter fleet, with the goal of fielding the first aircraft by fiscal year 2030. The projected total contract value, including all options, is approximately $7.1 billion. Sikorsky challenged the agency’s assignment of a rating of unacceptable to its proposal under the engineering design and development evaluation factor, architecture subfactor, which ultimately rendered the proposal ineligible for award. Sikorsky also argued that the agency should have found Bell’s proposal to be unacceptable. Finally, Sikorsky challenged the agency’s evaluation under the engineering design and development factor and the product supportability factor; the cost/price evaluation; and the best-value tradeoff decision. In denying the protest, GAO concluded that the Army reasonably evaluated Sikorsky’s proposal as technically unacceptable because Sikorsky failed to provide the level of architectural detail required by the RFP. GAO also denied Sikorsky’s various allegations about the acceptability of Bell’s proposal, including the assertion that the agency’s evaluation violated the terms of the solicitation or applicable procurement law or regulation. Finally, GAO dismissed Sikorsky’s additional arguments on the basis that Sikorsky was no longer an interested party to further challenge the procurement. GAO’s decision expresses no view as to the merits of these proposals. Judgments about which offeror will most successfully meet the government’s needs are reserved for the procuring agencies, subject only to statutory and regulatory requirements. GAO’s bid protest process is handled by GAO’s Office of General Counsel and examines whether procuring agencies have complied with procurement laws and regulations. Today’s decision was issued under a protective order because the decision may contain proprietary and source selection sensitive information. GAO has directed counsel for the parties to promptly identify information that cannot be publicly released so that GAO can expeditiously prepare and release a public version of the decision." Reference Link