GAO Denies Lockheed Martin’s OCI Protest in TOC-L Competition
In a May 2, 2025, decision, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) denied a protest filed by Lockheed Martin Corporation regarding the Air Force’s Tactical Operations Center – Light (TOC-L) Phase II procurement. Lockheed Martin alleged that Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) had unmitigated organizational conflicts of interest (OCIs) and that the solicitation lacked adequate information for offerors to compete intelligently. The GAO, however, concluded that the Air Force’s OCI assessment was reasonable and that the solicitation met the standards required under federal procurement law.
The dispute stems from SAIC’s simultaneous role as the cloud-based command and control (CBC2) software integrator and its participation in the TOC-L competition. Lockheed Martin argued this dual role created impaired objectivity and unequal access to information. Specifically, Lockheed Martin claimed SAIC’s systems engineering work on CBC2 could compromise its impartiality in evaluating integration issues under the TOC-L contract. However, the Air Force undertook a comprehensive OCI investigation, requiring all five competing offerors to submit mitigation plans and conducting an in-depth review.
Ultimately, the contracting officer determined that any potential OCI had been sufficiently mitigated. Key safeguards included retaining government control over all technical approvals, providing the CBC2 software as government-furnished equipment (GFE), and ensuring that SAIC’s recommendations were subject to independent validation through the Air Force’s design review process. GAO found this analysis and the mitigation measures reasonable, noting that disagreement with an agency’s judgment does not equate to proof of unreasonableness.
Lockheed Martin also challenged SAIC’s firewall implementation between its CBC2 and TOC-L teams, suggesting the agency failed to probe deeply into its effectiveness. Yet the GAO determined that the Air Force had neutralized any competitive advantage by establishing a robust bidder’s library containing relevant nonpublic information, which was accessible to all offerors. Because Lockheed Martin did not dispute the adequacy of this shared information, its remaining arguments about SAIC’s internal protections were deemed inconsequential.
The protester further attacked the adequacy of the solicitation, asserting that the lack of detailed technical data about the Raytheon BC3 software rendered it impossible to intelligently propose solutions. GAO disagreed, highlighting that the solicitation included a system requirements document (SRD) gap analysis and integration plan, thereby equipping offerors with sufficient insight to assess risks and devise strategies. The GAO reaffirmed that solicitations need not eliminate all performance uncertainty and that contractors must apply their expertise and business judgment in addressing gaps.
Finally, while the Air Force did issue a waiver of OCI rules under FAR 9.503 just before the GAO’s statutory deadline, GAO concluded that it was unnecessary to reach the merits of the waiver. Since the protest’s substantive OCI arguments lacked merit, any challenge to the waiver was rendered academic.
This decision underscores the deference afforded to agencies in OCI determinations, the importance of hard evidence in supporting OCI claims, and the reasonable expectation that contractors assess technical and cost risks based on available data. The case—Lockheed Martin Corporation, B-423294—was decided by the Comptroller General’s Office and authored by Edda Emmanuelli Perez.
Disclaimer: This summary is based on a public decision by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and is not guaranteed to be accurate. It does not constitute legal advice.
