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

B-401844 1 (2009-12-04)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadbgm0001 and id is 1 raw text is: ,G A O Comptroller General LXn , Accountability * Integrity * Reliability of the United States United States Government Accountability Office DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Washington, DC 20548 The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: METAG Insaat Ticaret A.S. File: B-401844 Date: December 4, 2009 James H. Roberts III, Esq., Van Scoyoc Kelly PLLC, for the protester. James D. Stephens, Esq., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for the agency. Paula A. Williams, Esq., and Ralph 0. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency's evaluation is denied where the record supports the reasonableness of the evaluations. DECISION METAG Insaat Ticaret A.S. (METAG) of Ankara, Turkey protests the award of a contract to Serka Insaat Ve Ticaret A.S. (Serka) of Istanbul, Turkey under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912ER-09-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers, for design and construction services. METAG argues that the agency's evaluation and its subsequent award to a significantly higher-priced offeror were improper. We deny the protest. On November 13, 2008, the Corps issued this RFP for a contractor to design and construct a strategic airlift ramp and hot cargo pad at the Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan. The solicitation contemplated award of a fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal was most advantageous to the government, price and other factors considered. RFP at 6. The RFP identified the following evaluation factors which were of equal importance: (1) price; (2) management and technical (with subfactors for management capabilities, technical capabilities, and subcontracting); (3) experience (with subfactors for design experience and construction experience); and (4) past performance (with subfactors for prime contractor past performance and subcontractor past performance). Id. at 8-13. Under the non-price factors and subfactors, proposals were to be rated as either outstanding (0), good (G), acceptable (A), marginal (M), susceptible to being made acceptable (SA), unacceptable (U), or neutral (N). Id. at 7.

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