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.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobadcgb0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
,. (
OV.LER C.
THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL
DEPCISION OF THE UNITED STATES
VVASHINGTON, D.C . 2054B
FILE: B-181723 DATE: July 10, 1975
MATTER OF: Graphical Technology Corp.
DIGEST:
In view of new facts presented by agency on issue neither
raised by any party to original protest nor in any way
dispositive of protest, but upon which GAO observation
was made, that portion of previous decision is withdrawn.
In our decision Graphical Technology Corporation, B-181723,
March 27, 1975, at pages 12-13, in discussing a matter which was
not an issue in the protest, we observed that:
Although not raised by any party, we wish to
point out a deficiency relating to the conduct of
negotiations. The proposal of Electronics [Associ-
ates, Inc.] was included within the competitive
range after the initial technical evaluation. The
procuring activity did not hold discussions with
that firm because of their extremely high price.
However, discussions were held with Hughes and GTC,
and the other offerors considered to be in the com-
petitive range, and Electronics was given the oppor-
tunity, along with Hughes and GTC, to submit a best
and final offer. It appears that a best and final
offer was received from Electronics; however, the
administrative report states that after receipt of
the best and final offers from Hughes and GTC 'it
was determined that Electronics was no longer to be
considered to have a reasonable chance for an award
because of their unusually high price and their pro-
posal was eliminated from the zone of consideration.'
ASPR § 3-805.1(a) (1974 ed.) provides, except
in certain situations not relevant here, that 'Written
or oral discussions shall be conducted with all respon-
sible offerors who submit proposals within a competitive
- 1 -](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobadcgb0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)