WASHINGTON, D.C. - Nov. 7, 2008 - Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) today filed a formal protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting a review of the evaluation conducted by the U.S. Army/Marine Corps Source Selection Authority (SSA) to identify development teams for the technical demonstration (TD) phase of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) program.
After careful examination of the data presented at the Nov. 5 debriefing, it is apparent that inconsistencies in the bid and evaluation process unfairly placed the Northrop Grumman team at a competitive disadvantage. Northrop Grumman requests that the GAO examine the process, which it believes is marred by unstated requirement changes and arbitrary maturity ratings.
Though press releases are among the things least likely to draw a copyright complaint, I'll leave it to the reader to click the link in order to read additional details regarding the protest. If the argument is based on fact then it carries some persuasion.
If this protest succeeds, I wonder which winning bidder turns into a loser? BAE/Navistar was a bit of a dark horse candidate, albeit with good success in winning MRAP bids. Lockheed Martin/Armor Holdings (BAE) was a favorite, with congressional pork addict John Murtha in its corner. General Tactical Vehicles (AM General/General Dynamics) was an uber-favorite but with evidently poor sight lines for the prototype vehicle's driver.
One portion of the Northrop Grumman/Oshkosh appeal refers to a lack of clarity regarding the importance placed on demonstrator vehicles/prototypes. What does that mean? Lockheed Martin gets the inside track for producing the first prototype? AM General gets a pass for tiny side windows since it's just a prototype? The fate of three small defense contracts and one great big defense contract may hinge in large part on the answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please remain on topic and keep coarse language to an absolute minimum. Comments in a language other than English will be assumed off topic.