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

B-274204.6 1 (1996-11-27)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptaeld0001 and id is 1 raw text is: oComptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE A protected decision was issued on the date below and was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been redacted or approved by the parties involved for public release. Matter of: Northrop Grumman Corporation; ITT Gilfillan File: B-274204; B-274204.2; B-274204.3; B-274204.4; B-274204.5; B-274204.6; B-274204.7 Date: November 27, 1996 Richard P. Rector, Esq., Kevin P. Mullen, Esq., and Chandra Emery, Esq., Piper & Marbury, for Northrop Grumman Corporation; and Richard L. Moorhouse, Esq., Dorn C. McGrath III, Esq., Steven A. Diaz, Esq., Mary F. Withum, Esq., and Stacey E. Young, Esq., Holland & Knight, for ITT Gilfillan, the protesters. Thomas J. Madden, Esq., John J. Pavlick, Jr., Esq., Carla D. Craft, Esq., Jerome S. Gabig, Jr., and Paul A. Debolt, Esq., Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti, for Raytheon Company, an intervenor. Gregory H. Petkoff, Esq., Marian E. Sullivan, Esq., Roger J. McAvoy, Esq., Edward L. Fitzmaurice, Jr., Esq., and Stephen T. Davis, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. David A. Ashen, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that agency improperly determined most likely mean time between corrective maintenance action (MTBCMA) for each offeror's proposed airport surveillance radar system, rather than accepting the proposed MTBCMAs, is denied where solicitation indicated agency's intent to conduct its own assessment and, moreover, accepting offerors' proposed figures would render this area of the evaluation meaningless, since offerors would be expected to employ the most favorable assumptions in their calculations, leaving the agency with no basis for comparing the proposed MTBCMAs. 2. Protest that agency improperly failed to disclose during discussions the mathematical formula used to calculate mean time between corrective maintenance action (MTBCMA) is denied; such methodologies for evaluating proposals under the stated evaluation criteria need not be disclosed by agencies and, in any case, since nondevelopmental system was required and system operational testing already had taken place, offerors would not have been in a position to redesign their proposed 11261224

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