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

B-278165 1 (1998-01-05)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptahnd0001 and id is 1 raw text is: oComptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a I GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of: International Consultants, Inc.; International Trade Bridge, Inc. File: B-278165; B-278165.2 Date: January 5, 1998 Douglas N. Harty, Esq., for International Consultants, Inc., and Carlos M. Caldas for International Trade Bridge, Inc., the protesters. Marian E. Sullivan, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Susan K McAuliffe, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Award of a contract on the basis of awardee's higher-priced, technically superior proposal is unobjectionable where the evaluation is supported by the record and is consistent with the solicitation evaluation criteria and the agency reasonably determined that the difference in technical merit among the proposals justified the cost difference. DECISION International Consultants, Inc. (ICI) and International Trade Bridge, Inc. (ITB) protest the award of a time-and-materials contract to Integrated Information Technology Corporation (IITC) under request for proposals (RFP) No. F33601-96-R- 9007, issued by the Department of the Air Force as a competitive 8(a) set-aside for hazardous material, hazardous waste, and pollution prevention program management services, as well as technical support, at the Materials Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. ICI and ITB contend that the award was improper because the agency's technical and past performance evaluations were flawed; the agency was biased in favor of IITC, since that firm's proposed subcontractor was the incumbent contractor of the required services; and the agency did not make a proper best value determination We deny the protests. 1To the extent the protesters contend that the agency improperly extended the incumbent's prior contract after the incumbent had graduated from the 8(a) program, the contention is untimely raised, since the protest, which involves a separate procurement, was filed more than 10 days after the basis of protest was known. 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(2) (1997).

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