About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-277849.2 1 (1998-01-08)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptahmo0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Comptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a I GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of: Sytel, Inc. File: B-277849.2; B-277849.3 Date: January 8, 1998 Keith L. Baker, Esq., Jeffrey E. Weinstein, Esq., and Timi E. Nickerson, Esq., Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC; and Eric J. Marcotte, Esq., Winston & Strawn, for the protester. Lindsay Ball for Dynacs Engineering Co., Inc., the intervenor. Bernard J. Roan, Esq., and Rami S. Hanash, Esq., National Aeronautics & Space Administration, for the agency. Christine Davis, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency reasonably credited one proposal based on favorable impressions of key personnel during discussions and downgraded another proposal for the apparent lack of teamwork of key personnel during discussions where solicitation indicated agency could consider such information. 2. Agency reasonably determined that the awardee's award fee approach provided sufficient performance incentives, notwithstanding that the awardee proposed no additional fee in the event the agency exercised an option to acquire additional labor hours during the contract performance period. 3. Agency reasonably evaluated the protester's and awardee's Total Compensation Plans as comparable where the overall cost difference between the two plans, considering all wages and fringe benefits, was negligible. 4. Agency properly conducted discussions expressing concern regarding the protester's labor rates where they were less than those paid by the incumbent and the protester's proposal did not adequately justify such lower rates. 5. Protester's post-protest statement that, but for the agency's alleged improper and misleading discussions, it would have reduced the labor rates in its best and final offer in an amount sufficient to negate the awardee's cost advantage does not establish a reasonable possibility of prejudice, where there is no credible evidence supporting this statement.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most