Lockheed Martin Systems Integration-Owego

A firm protested an Air Force contract award for an avionics architecture system, contending that the Air Force (1) incorrectly determined it protester was not a viable source, (2) misled it concerning the definition of the term "system" as it applied to the solicitation, and (3) incorrectly requested a cost and schedule estimate based on a second set of criteria. GAO held that the Air Force (1) unreasonably determined that only one source could meet its requirements, (2) improperly used the term "system," causing the protester to prepare a proposal based on incorrect information, and (3) miscommunicated the parameters of the cost and schedule estimate, resulting in a more costly proposal. Accordingly, the protest was sustained, and GAO recommended that the Air Force (1) determine whether it is practicable, taking into consideration cost and disruption, to provide the protester with an opportunity to respond to the Air Force's requirement, and then take action consistent with its determination and (2) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.