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/gaobadovm0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
G A O Comptroller General
Accountability * Integrity * Reliability of the United States
United States Government Accountability Office .............................................................................................................................
Unsigt , Stats Gn ADOCUMENT 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
Decision .approved for public release.
Matter of: ITT Electronic Systems
File: B-406405; B-406405.2
Date: May 21, 2012
J. Scott Hommer III, Esq., Paul A. Debolt, Esq., Keir X. Bancroft, Esq., George W.
Wyatt, IV, Esq., and Christina K. Kube, Esq., Venable LLP, for the protester.
Thomas P. Humphrey, Esq., John E. McCarthy Jr., Esq., Jonathan M. Baker, Esq.,
Grant J. Book, Esq., and Derek R. Mullins, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for
BAE Systems Information and Electronic Systems Integration Inc., and
Richard A. Sauber, Esq., Deneen J. Melander, Esq., Michael Waldman, Esq., and
Sue Chen, Esq., Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber, LLP, for
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, the intervenors.
Tina M. Pixler, Esq., Christopher C. Schwan, Esq., and Roger W. Cornelius, Esq.,
Department of the Army, for the agency.
Matthew T. Crosby, Esq., and Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
1. Unincorporated division of corporate parent that submitted proposal and filed
protest is interested party to protest notwithstanding post-proposal-submission
corporate restructuring whereby unincorporated division and assets committed to
contract performance were transferred to new, stand-alone corporate entity.
2. Protest that agency imposed unstated evaluation criterion for data reflecting
testing under dynamic flight conditions is denied where solicitation for development
of missile countermeasure system to be used aboard military aircraft adequately
advised offerors that agency would consider performance of proposed systems
under dynamic flight conditions.
3. Protest that agency unreasonably evaluated [DELETED] cable component of
protester's proposed countermeasure system is denied where content of protester's
proposal reasonably supports agency's evaluation criticisms.
4. Protest that agency treated offerors unequally is denied where record reflects
reasonable basis for distinction that agency identified between proposals.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobadovm0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)