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

B-297508,B-297508.2 1 (2006-01-26)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadiwp0001 and id is 1 raw text is: I A aComptroller General K, M 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: The MIL Corporation File: B-297508; B-297508.2 Date: January 26, 2006 Louis D. Victorino, Esq., Jonathan S. Aronie, Esq., Anne B. Perry, Esq., Aleksander Lamvol, Esq., and Marko W. Kipa, Esq., Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP, for the protester. Richard J. Huber, Esq., and Robin Coll, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Louis A. Chiarella, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest issue raised subsequent to a post-award debriefing provided to a vendor in a Federal Supply Schedule procurement is untimely where it was filed more than 10 days after the basis of protest was known; since the procurement was not conducted on the basis of competitive proposals, the timeliness rules based on protests which challenge a procurement conducted on the basis of competitive proposals under which a debriefing is requested and required are not applicable. 2. Protest challenging the evaluation of vendors' quotations is denied where the record establishes that the agency's evaluation was reasonable and in accord with the stated evaluation criteria. 3. Protest alleging that, in its evaluation of the protester's quotation, the agency unreasonably ignored information that was simply too close at hand (but not contained in the protester's quotation) is denied where the protester fails to demonstrate that the information in question was known to the individuals involved in the evaluation of the quotation. 4. Protest that agency improperly changed the stated basis for award from best value to low priced/technically acceptable is denied where the record reflects that the agency found the quotations of the awardee and protester to be, at best, technically equal and made award to the lower-priced vendor; the fact that no price/technical tradeoff was required does not negate the fact that the agency properly adhered to the best-value award basis.

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