The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has upheld the latest protests on a contract for combat search and rescue (CSAR) helicopters, forcing the US Air Force to reconsider its plan to award a new contract.
The Boeing HH-47 won the original contract in November 2006, but three months later the GAO found an error in the air force's evaluation metrics. The service agreed to solicit new bids in June, but Lockheed Martin and Sikorsky immediately filed new protests.
Both companies separately objected that they would not be allowed to fully revise their original proposals in the second round of bidding.
The GAO has sided with the protesters for the second time, recommending that the USAF solicit new bids again to allow the competitors to fully revise their proposals to respond to the new evaluation criteria.
The air force must either adopt the agency's recommendation or potentially face a legal challenge by Lockheed and Sikorsky. The service is currently evaluating the second round of bids, but USAF officials could not immediately respond to questions about what it plans to do next.
"We are pleased with the GAO's decision and await information from the air force on its plans to implement the recommended corrective action," says Lockheed, which is offering the US101 in partnership with AgustaWestland and Bell Helicopter.
Sikorsky says: "We hope the air force will take corrective action to ensure all competing aircraft are fully and fairly evaluated to provide the best solution for the warfighter and the taxpayer. We are confident Sikorsky's HH-92 helicopter offers the best value for the CSAR-X mission."
For Boeing, the GAO's second ruling in the case means continued uncertainty on a contract the company believes it rightly claimed upon its award nearly nine months ago.
"We are very disappointed that the GAO has sustained the latest competition protests," Boeing says. "We believe the air force has acted in good faith in response to the recommendation on the first protest. And this decision will once again delay putting this weapon system in the hands of warfighters."
Lockheed's statement notes, however, that it will "support a schedule that will deliver this urgently needed capability to the warfighter as quickly as possible".
The dispute arose because the USAF originally asked the competitors to submit detailed life-cycle cost estimates, but instead used the Sikorsky HH-60 fleet as the baseline for evaluating the proposals.
In February, the GAO ruled that the air force blundered by evaluating the proposals differently than required by the solicitation.
The air force responded by telling the contractors to submit the mostly same cost and pricing data in the second round of bids, but to eliminate any life-cycle costs estimates that were unique to their helicopters. The rest of the offers were required to remain unchanged.
The GAO's latest finding rules that where "an agency materially changes the solicitation's evaluation scheme, offerers must be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the revised evaluation scheme".
Source: Flight International
