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

B-281919 1 (1999-05-03)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptajih0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Comptroller 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 GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of: KBM Group, Inc. File: B-281919; B-281919.2 Date: May 3, 1999 Alexander J. Brittin, Esq., Patrick K O'Keefe, Esq., and Jeremy M. Griffin, Esq., McKenna & Cuneo, and John S. Pachter, Esq., Smith, Pachter, McWhorter & D'Ambro sio, for the protester. Richard J. Vacura, Esq., Holly Emrick Svetz, Esq., and William J. Crowley, Esq., Piper & Marbury, and Rex L. Fuller III, Esq., for Milvets Systems Technology, Inc., an intervenor. Duane Zezula, Esq., Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, for the agency. Guy R. Pietrovito, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency did not mislead protester during discussions even though award was ultimately made based on price and agency did not inform protester that its price was higher than awardee's price, where agency did not believe that protester's price was too high. 2. Agency did not conduct unequal discussions with awardee and protester where agency conducted technical discussions with awardee, whose technical proposal was initially evaluated as containing a number of weaknesses, while conducting no technical discussions with protester, whose initial proposal was evaluated as containing no weaknesses. 3. Protest that protester is entitled to a higher adjectival rating than awardee based upon protester's specific incumbent experience and staff is denied where agency in fact reasonably assessed the relative merits of protester's and awardee's proposals, including protester's specific experience and staff. 4. Protest that source selection authority did not adequately consider the merits of protester's technical proposal is denied where source selection authority considered the relative merits of protester's and awardee's proposals and reasonably determined

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