THIS OPINION WAS INITIALLY ISSUED UNDER PROTECTIVE ORDER AND IS NOW RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC IN ITS ENTIRETY April 6, 1993 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION: April 1, 1993 GSBCA 12310-P WILTEL, INC. Protester, v. DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY, Respondent, and AT&T COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Intervenor. David W. Burgett, William A. Bradford, Jr., Pierre M. Donahue, Daniel C. Sweeney, Stephen G. Vaskov, Timothy F. Mellett, Martha R. Moffett and Ronald J. Wiltsie, II of Hogan & Hartson, Washington, DC, counsel for Protester. Richard A. Morgan, Office of the Assistant Regulatory Counsel Telecommunications, Department of Defense, Arlington, VA; and Clifton M. Hasegawa, H. Jack Shearer, and Douglas A. White, Office of General Counsel, Defense Information Systems Agency, Scott AFB, IL, counsel for Respondent. Thomas L. Patten, Roger S. Goldman, David R. Hazelton, Philip L. Gordon, Thomas D. Sydnor, II and Tina E. Sciocchetti of Latham & Watkins, Washington, DC; and Jon S. Hoak, G. Ridgley Loux, and Steven W. DeGeorge of AT&T Communications, Inc., counsel for Intervenor. Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), NEILL, and WILLIAMS. NEILL, Board Judge. This protest was filed by WilTel, Inc. (WilTel), on February 19, 1993. WilTel protests the recent modification of a contract awarded to AT&T Communications, Inc. (AT&T), on March 28, 1984, by the Department of Defense's (DoD's) Defense Commercial Communications Office (DECCO). The contract is said to be a ten-year leased services contract covering services and equipment for the Defense Commercial Telecommunications Network (DCTN). WilTel contends that the modification in question, which adds a new high-speed telecommunications transmission service known as "T3 Service," is outside the scope of the original contract. AT&T has intervened in this protest as an intervenor of right. AT&T and respondent, the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), have jointly moved that we dismiss this protest for lack of jurisdiction. Their motion is based on the contention that the procurement action is exempt by law from our jurisdiction under the Warner Amendment, as that provision now appears in the Brooks Act, as amended. See 40 U.S.C. 759(a)(3)(C) (1988). These same parties have also moved that we dismiss the protest as untimely filed. In briefing the issues raised in the two pending motions to dismiss, the parties have proposed a considerable amount of documentation for inclusion in the record. Much of this material consists of depositions and deposition exhibits. These submissions have been admitted to the record without objection.[foot #] 1 For the reasons set out below, we grant the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and, consequently, do not reach the joint motion to dismiss the protest as untimely filed. Findings of Fact The Defense Communication System 1. The Defense Communication System (DCS) is a combination of Government-owned and leased systems consisting largely of separate transmission and information transfer systems such as the Defense Switched Network (DSN), the Worldwide Military Command and Control System (WWMCCS), the Defense Red Switch Network (DRSN), the Defense Information System Network (DISN), ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 1 Material contained in these submissions is identified herein as belonging either to the "WilTel Record Submission" or to the "AT&T Record Submission." ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- and other classified networks. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7, Exhibit 1, 4. 2. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, with the assistance of DISA, determine the overall capacity of DCS. DISA then designs DoD's communications system to meet this capacity requirement. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7 at 16-17. 3. Mr. John G. Grimes, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Defense-wide Command, Control and Communications (C3), has testified that the DSN provides switched voice service primarily for command and control and intelligence functions to authorized DoD users worldwide. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7 at 18, 67. He has likewise testified that the DSN is composed of four subnetworks, namely, DSN-Europe, DSN-Pacific, DSN-Southwest Asia, and DSN-CONUS (Continental United States). Id., Tab 7, Exhibit 1, 5. The Defense Commercial Telecommunication Network as Part of DCS 4. The Defense Commercial Telecommunication Network (DCTN) is a leased, long-haul telecommunications system providing end- to-end common user, switched voice and video, and dedicated data service in support of DoD command, control, communications and intelligence (C3I) requirements. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 3, Exhibit 1, 2. The DCTN consists of 20,754 switched voice circuits, 101 video circuits, and 12,927 dedicated, point-to- point circuits. AT&T Record Submission, Tab 26 at 2. 5. The solicitation which led to the original DCTN described the military objectives of the network as follows: To lease satellite transmission capacity and wideband terrestrial capacity which can be rapidly and flexibly allocated to meet the needs of the National Command Authorities (NCA), the DoD, and the Military Departments (MILDEPs) under crisis and emergency conditions such as mobilization of U.S. forces for overseas deployment, military exercises, mobilization and transfer of resources for assistance to allies, military participation during natural disasters, and evacuation of Americans from hostile environments. Respondent's and Intervenor's Joint Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, Exhibit A at 3. 6. The DCTN provides the CONUS switched voice portion of the DSN. It is also utilized for backbone transmission and connectivity by several major DoD common user telecommunication networks associated with command and control, such as the DISN and the DRSN (identified in Finding 1), the AUTODIN (Automatic Digital Information Network), the DTN (Data Transmission Network), and the DDN (Defense Data Network). AT&T Record Submission, Tab 29 at 4-5. See also WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7 at 18, 32, 34, Tab 3 at 123, Tab 5 at 80. 7. A number of DoD subnetworks such as AFNET (Air Force Network), NAVNET (Navy Network), and MCDN (Marine Corps Data Network) also rely on DCTN for transmission of voice and data support. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7, Exhibit 1, 6. Other DoD networks using the DCTN transmission services are the JCSAN (Joint Chiefs of Staff Alert Network), AUTOVON (Automatic Voice Network)[foot #] 2, AUTOSEVOCOM (Automatic Secure Voice Communication Network), and TRITAC (Tri-Service Tactical Communication System). Id., Tab 1 at 170-76. Function and Purpose of the DCTN 8. The DCTN's individual customers rely on the network to perform a wide variety of functions. These include the transmission of: (1) intelligence data between supercomputers; (2) classified imagery data and data bases; (3) command and control decision support systems; and (4) commander in chief (CINC) activities and missions. The DCTN is said to be used on a daily basis by the National Command Authorities, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Joint Staff, and the military services. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (C3) has declared under penalty of perjury that commanders of unified and specified commands use the DCTN on a daily basis to transmit command and control orders to their units, to transmit intelligence information from collection points to analysis points and then back to field commanders, and to receive situation reports from the field and respond to them. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7, Exhibit 1, 6. The Communications Management Specialist responsible for the administration of the DCTN contract has stated that DCTN transmission supports various intelligence gathering operations around the clock. Id., Tab 3, Exhibit 1, 5. 9. DISA contends that the Government has designed the DCTN with an adequate level of access lines and switches to support Warner-Amendment-exempt requirements during times of war or national crises. The size of the DCTN is said to be based entirely on Warner-Amendment-exempt demand. DISA freely admits that, once the required capacity is acquired for projected exempt requirements, there will be incidental excess capacity for non- exempt requirements. Nevertheless, the amount of non-exempt traffic is said to have no bearing on the capacity actually procured for the system originally. AT&T Record Submission, Tab 29 at 2. ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 2 As of March 1, 1993, AUTOVON has been merged with the DCTN. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 3 at 46-47 and Exhibit 3. ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- 10. DCTN's network control and end user locations guarantee 100% availability of the network for command and control and intelligence requirements through the use of network controls and local base line load controls, plus minimization calling controls. Additionally, the DCTN provides a wide array of military unique features (MUFs). These MUFs are requirements of the DCTN contract and include: international gateways, multi- level precedence and preemption, polygrid routing with diversity, dual homing of critical users, full emergency backup power at switching nodes, and surge capacity to handle huge increases of traffic during crisis situations. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 2, Exhibit 1, 7; Tab 7, Exhibit 1, 5. 11. With regard to the international gateway MUF, DCTN switched voice services provide network connectivity to all CONUS, and outside CONUS, DSN locations. Through these international gateways, services are available to military locations in Europe, Panama, Korea, Japan and Canada. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 2, 8. 12. Multi-level precedence and preemption (MLPP) is a five level system of precedence that allows higher level users to preempt facilities in use by lower precedence subscribers. The five levels in descending order of precedence are flash override, flash, immediate, priority, and routine. The MLPP capabilities are activated at selected subscriber locations through the use of special sixteen button telephone sets. A precedence call causes the switch to search for idle internodal channels or access lines. When no idle facilities are available, the preemption feature permits a higher precedence call (calls with an established precedence level other than routine) to disconnect a trunk or line being used by a call of lesser precedence on a ruthless basis and then seize the facility for its own use. DCTN's MUFs ensure that higher level precedence communications are completed. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 2, 9. 13. Polygrid routing is used within the internodal network of DCTN. This arrangement consists of overlapping grids of interconnecting switching centers and is composed of all digital 1.5 Mbps (megabytes per second) facilities. Polygrid routing uses a direct route, if one exists, and up to nine alternate routes between every switch pair. This large number of logical paths between switches enhances the survivability of the DCTN network since a large number of switching centers must be damaged or destroyed before the network is disrupted. Critical users have dual homed private branch exchanges (PBXs) that are connected to two different switches. In the event that a call arriving at one of these switches finds the access line to the terminating PBX unavailable, the call is transferred to the other dual homed switch for completion. All switching nodes of the DCTN network are provided with independent emergency backup power facilities and can maintain all required services for up to seven hours in the event that commercial power is disrupted. The DCTN is specially designed and engineered to guarantee sufficient capacity to meet network surge and to assure that sufficient capacity exists during periods of war and national crisis. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 2, 10. 14. The additional feature of diversion to attendant assistance, built into the DCTN, also ensures completion of high-level precedence calls. With diversion to attendant assistance, a high level precedence call (priority or higher) that cannot be completed automatically within any reasonable period of time, is automatically routed to an attendant operator who assists in manually completing the call. This MUF applies to any precedence call that cannot be completed for any reason, including calls that reach the call destination but are not answered within a reasonable period of time (usually thirty seconds). WilTel Record Submission, Tab 2, 11. 15. The DCTN MUF "flash non-blocking" ensures that no calls of flash or flash override precedence level are ever blocked from completion. Flash and flash override precedence is reserved for DoD personnel with responsibility for key decisions, strategic and tactical commanders at all echelons, nuclear forces, and others in DoD charged with accomplishing military missions in support of national objectives. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 2, 12. 16. Many users of the DCTN also have STU (Secure Telephone Unit) II and STU III secure telephone handsets. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 1 at 36-37. On request, the DCTN also provides encryption on above ground links. Id., Tab 2 at 47. In addition, some networks which rely on DCTN as a transmission path, such as the DRSN, have "encryption devices on the DCTN circuits." Id., Tab 7 at 41. 17. The DCTN and the DSN (of which DCTN is a part) constitute a dedicated DoD network to which the President and other National Command Authorities have access. It is not, however, possible to access the public switched network through the DCTN. Access to the public switched network is provided to DoD users through FTS2000.[foot #] 3 FTS2000 also serves as the back-up for switched service users preempted from the DCTN. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7 at 60-64 and Exhibit 1, 5-6. T3 Service for the DCTN 18. The program manager for the DCTN has explained that the network's T3 or wideband service took over two years to develop ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 3 FTS2000 is a general purpose telecommunications network (within CONUS) managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) and designed to provide long-haul analog and digital data transmissions for the entire Federal Government, including DoD. ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- in response to demands of classified users within DoD engaged in command and control and intelligence activities. The service is intended to replace existing T1 circuit service currently provided by the DCTN. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 1, Exhibit 1, 5-6. 19. The classified users and numerous other DoD users indicating an interest in the DCTN T3 service include the Airborne Early Warning/Ground Integrated Segment (AEGIS), the Air Force Intelligence Center (AFIC), the Joint Chiefs of Staff Alerting Network (JCSAN), the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), Navy Intelligence Service (NIS), and the Navy Security Group (NSG). Id., 7-9; AT&T Record Submission, Tab 29 at 6. DCTN Users and Traffic 20. The Chief of the Allocation and Engineering Division of DISA's Telecommunication Management and Services Office (TMSO) has stated that the military departments request services from DISA in the form of a document called a telecommunications service request (TSR). Each TSR states whether the requesting military department considers the requirement to be Warner- Amendment-exempt and, if so, which exemption applies. If the requirement is considered exempt, DISA attempts to satisfy it by use of the DCTN. According to this DISA official, the only requirements forwarded for placement on DCTN are those determined to be Warner-Amendment-exempt. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 5, Exhibit 2, 1-4. 21. The requisite determination that a particular telecommunication requirement is Warner-Amendment-exempt is made by the requirement activity itself and not by DISA. The determination is made in accordance with guidance issued by DoD and DISA. Once made by the requirement activity, however, the determination is accepted by DISA at face value and not subject to further scrutiny. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 1 at 108-10, Tab 3 at 31, 80-81, Tab 5 at 13-14, 27-26, 73. See also Documents Supporting Respondent's and Intervenor's Joint Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, Tab C, DoD Instruction, No. 4640.14, Subject: Base and Long-Haul Telecommunications Equipment and Services (Dec. 6, 1991). 22. Protester, itself, has recognized that the DCTN satisfies the Warner-Amendment-exempt requirements of its users. AT&T Record Submission, Tabs 7, 20; WilTel Record Submission, Tab 4, Exhibit 18. 23. The fact that DoD tries to limit use of the DCTN to Warner-Amendment-exempt subscribers, however, does not mean that the network does not carry non-exempt traffic. The Communications Management Specialist responsible for the administration of the DCTN contract has explained that because the level of Warner-Amendment-exempt traffic may not require full utilization of the DCTN circuits at all times, DoD utilizes the DCTN for incidental administrative traffic during non-peak periods. See also Finding 9. This is said to be done in order to maintain the cost effectiveness of the total network. The network administrator adds, however: Nonetheless, the paramount and overriding purpose of DCTN is the support of Warner-exempt requirements, and due to precedence and preemption features of the DCTN, any administrative traffic can be preempted. That is, the contractually required MUFs operate to guarantee that DCTN is 100 percent available at all times for Warner-exempt purposes. Therefore, this purpose is never compromised. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 3, Exhibit 1, 8. 24. DISA is not able to provide a meaningful estimate of the percentage of DCTN traffic which might be attributable at any given time to Warner-Amendment-exempt activity -- as opposed to non-exempt activity. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 3 at 108-09; AT&T Record Submission, Tab 29 at 2. 25. GSA and DoD are in agreement regarding the use of excess capacity on DoD common user networks such as the DCTN. Under the terms of that agreement, GSA has approved "the use of available capacity on DoD common user networks for requirements not exempt under the Warner Amendment if the available capacity was originally, or is now justified based on Warner Amendment exempt requirements." If capacity needed for non-exempt requirements exceeds that justified for Warner-Amendment-exempt requirements, then FTS2000 must be used when it satisfies the requirement. If the requirement cannot be satisfied by FTS2000, then other DoD common user networks may be used. WilTel Record Submission, Tab 7, Exhibit 8 (Letter of March 16, 1992, from Donald E. Scott, Associate Administrator, GSA, to John G. Grimes, Deputy Assistant Secretary, DoD). Discussion The contention of DISA and AT&T that the Board lacks jurisdiction over this protest is based on provisions of the Warner Amendment, 10 U.S.C. 2315 (1988). The provisions of that amendment now also appear in the Brooks Act, as amended in October 1986 by Part B of the Paperwork Reduction Reauthorization Act, Pub. L. Nos. 99-500, 99-591, 100 Stat. 1783-340, 3341-340 (PRRA). The pertinent portion of the Brooks Act, as amended, now reads: (2)(A) For purposes of this section, the term "automatic data processing equipment" means any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching interchange, transmission, or reception, of data or information-- (i) by a Federal agency, . . . . . . . . (B) Such term includes-- (i) computers; (ii) ancillary equipment; (iii) software, firmware, and similar procedures; (iv) services, including support services; and (v) related resources as defined by regulations issued by the Administrator [of] General Services. (3) This section does not apply to -- . . . . (C) The procurement by the Department of Defense of automatic data processing equipment or services if the function, operation, or use of which-- (i) involves intelligence activities; (ii) involves cryptologic activities related to national security; (iii) involves command and control of military forces; (iv) involves equipment which is an integral part of a weapon or weapons system; or (v) is critical to the direct fulfillment of military or intelligence missions, provided that this exclusion shall not include automatic data processing equipment used for routine administrative and business applications such as payroll, finance, logistics, and personnel management. 40 U.S.C. 759(a) (1988). DISA and AT&T maintain that the procurement of the T3 circuits which is the subject of this protest is exempt from our jurisdiction for four reasons. First, the circuits and the DCTN, of which they will be a part, are said to involve intelligence activities. Second, the circuits and the DCTN are said to involve cryptologic activities related to national security. Third, the circuits and the DCTN are said to involve command and control of military forces. Fourth and finally, they are said to be critical to the direct fulfillment of military and intelligence missions. There is, without a doubt, a considerable amount of overlap in the four Warner Amendment exceptions relied upon by DISA and AT&T in this case. Based on the record before us, we are convinced that the T3 circuits in question and the DCTN in which they will be installed involve intelligence activities and/or cryptologic activity related to national security. This conclusion is based on several facts. First, there are a number of intelligence activities and activities involved in classified missions which have indicated an interest in the wideband services which would be available through the T3 circuits. Finding 19. Second, we are satisfied that the new circuits will be embedded in the DCTN. Finding 18. Third, there is ample evidence that the DCTN can be and is, on occasion, adequately secured for the transmission of encrypted intelligence data. Finding 16. Finally there is the unqualified and unrebutted assertion that the DCTN is used to transmit encrypted intelligence information concerning national security. Findings 3-8. Given these facts, we see no reason why we should not conclude that the use of the T3 circuits within the DCTN will involve intelligence activity and/or cryptologic activity related to national security. In a similar vein, the record before us amply supports the conclusion that the T3 circuits and the DCTN in which they will be installed, involve various Warner-Amendment-exempt activities such as command and control of military forces and direct support of multiple military or intelligence missions. Findings 3-8. Protester itself freely admits this. Finding 22. The ultimate question posed by protester in this case, however, is not whether the T3 circuits and the DCTN containing them involve Warner-Amendment-exempt activity but whether the quantity of non-exempt activity or traffic on the network is sufficient to vitiate or compromise the availability of any of these exemptions. DISA is unable to indicate what the mix of exempt versus non-exempt traffic is. Finding 24. We are told by a DoD official that only Warner-Amendment-exempt requirements are forwarded by TMSO for placement on the DCTN. Finding 20. The determination of what is and what is not exempt, however, is left to the requirement activities themselves and not separately verified by DISA. Finding 21. Protester understandably questions the accuracy of these determinations. In particular, protester underscores the fact that the regulatory guidance provided to the activities to assist them in making these determinations describes exempt requirements in some detail but affords little or no guidance on what constitutes non-exempt requirements. In the final analysis, we are untroubled -- at least in this case -- by the possible inaccuracy of these determinations. The DCTN is designed and sized to meet 100% of the actually anticipated network requirements for command and control and intelligence at times of national and international crisis. Findings 9-15. When the DCTN is not taxed to its maximum capacity, there is, presumably, considerable room on the network for much that is unquestionably non-exempt as well as for that which may be questionably exempt. DISA readily admits to the presence of incidental non-exempt traffic on the DCTN during times of relative calm. Finding 9. Given the obvious high cost of maintaining the DCTN in its requisite state of readiness, it is only logical that DoD should make use of the system in the most cost effective manner possible by, among other things, running non-exempt traffic on the network as well when this is possible. See Finding 23. GSA itself appears to have recognized this fact in its agreement with DoD regarding the utilization of common user networks and the FTS2000. See Finding 25. In short, notwithstanding protester's arguments to the contrary, we do not see the presence of non-exempt or even questionably exempt traffic on the DCTN as compromising the network's Warner-Amendment-exempt status. In determining whether the network is exempt, we look to its ultimate purpose and design and not to any interim use the DoD may choose to make of it for purposes of cost effectiveness. The incorporation of the MLPP and other military use features into the DCTN assures us that when and if the network is taxed to the maximum in accordance with its primary purpose, any remaining traffic will be amply suffused with Warner Amendment missions as to eliminate concern for the compromise of any available exceptions. See Computer Sciences Corp., GSBCA 10388-P, 90-1 BCA 22,538, at 113,103, 1989 BPD 377, at 6. Protester in challenging the contention of DISA and AT&T that the procurement of T3 circuits for the DCTN is outside our protest jurisdiction relies heavily upon our decision in Contel Federal Systems, Inc., GSBCA 11060, 91-2 BCA 23,764, 1991 BPD 33. The reliance is misplaced. The procurement in Contel concerned a telecommunications modernization project (TMP) for an administrative telecommunication service at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. In that case respondent argued that the telecommunication service in question was used for various Warner-Amendment-exempt functions and, therefore, a protest regarding the procurement was beyond our jurisdiction. We concluded otherwise. In Contel, we saw a definite distinction between the TMP in question and the DoD dedicated system to which it was to be linked. We wrote: TMP is not a dedicated command, control, communications, and intelligence network, however. Rather, it will contain links through which TMP users can be connected with such networks and with the Defense Switched Network, which will be "the preferred communications means" for command and control. . . . Thus, although the TMP is being acquired so that Fort Belvoir users may have access to such networks, . . . it is not one itself. Contel, 91-2 BCA at 119,037, 1991 BPD 33 at 11. We were, nonetheless, prepared in that case to consider whether the TMP procurement was exempt. We looked to respondent, however, to demonstrate that this local base system was in fact used primarily for command and control and intelligence purposes. Based on the record developed by the parties, we ultimately concluded that the evidence offered by the respondent was anecdotal at best and insufficient to support the conclusory statements made by Army officials about the system's purposes. In the instant case, WilTel is of the opinion that the acquisition of T3 service for the DCTN is closely analogous to the TMP procurement in Contel. It, therefore, claims that DISA and AT&T must demonstrate in quantitative terms that the T3 circuits and the DCTN will be used primarily for Warner- Amendment-exempt requirements. This, according to protester, they are unable to do. The admitted use of the DCTN for non- exempt traffic and the inability to state with precision how much non-exempt traffic is carried at any one time on the network is perceived by WilTel as a fatal flaw in any argument for exemption. In Contel, we were examining the issue of whether the modernization of a base telecommunication system was exempt. Under DISA's own regulations, such systems are not part of the DCS and may or may not be exempt. See Wiltel Record Submission, Tab 5, Exhibit 1 at xiii. See also Documents Supporting Respondent's and Intervenor's Joint Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, Tab C, DoD Instruction, No. 4640.14, Subject: Base and Long-Haul Telecommunications Equipment and Services (Dec. 6, 1991) at 5. Upon reviewing the evidence provided by the Army, we concluded that it was insufficient to prove that the system was exempt. By contrast, in this case, we are dealing with an integral component of a recognized DoD dedicated telecommunication network. Finding 17. Here the test does not consist of a simple, static, quantitative evaluation of the type of traffic on the DCTN. Rather, we look to respondent to describe the nature and purpose of the network. The detailed evidence developed for the record by the parties confirms that the T3 circuits in question will be part of the DCTN taking over functions currently performed by the network's T1 circuits. Finding 18. The evidence likewise shows that the DCTN is an integral part of a dedicated DoD telecommunication system designed and sized to respond effectively to the demands for command and control or for the accomplishment of critical military or intelligence missions which may be occasioned by a severe national or international crisis. Findings 4-15. Given the record thus constituted in this case, we conclude that respondent has met its burden of proof and that the procurement in question is outside our protest jurisdiction. Decision This protest is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. ___________________________ EDWIN B. NEILL Board Judge We concur: __________________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ________________ STEPHEN M. DANIELS MARY ELLEN COSTER WILLIAMS Board Judge Board Judge