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

B-298411 1 (2006-09-19)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptasqk0001 and id is 1 raw text is: A G A O Comptroller General . 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: Advanced Systems Development, Inc. File: B-298411; B-298411.2 Date: September 19, 2006 Paul E. Pompeo, Esq., Kara L. Daniels, Esq., and David J. Craig, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for the protester. William L. Walsh, Jr., Esq., J. Scott Hommer, III, Esq., Peter A. Riesen, Esq., and Keir X. Bancroft, Esq., Venable LLP, for KENROB Information Technology Solutions, Inc., an intervenor. Andrew Blumenfeld, Esq., and Andy Bramnick, Esq., Washington Headquarters Services, Department of Defense, for the agency. Ralph 0. White, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protester's contention that the agency conducted flawed discussions regarding price is sustained where (1) the agency corrected an error in the awardee's pricing; (2) the agency concluded that the awardee's price, as corrected, violated the solicitation's price target; (3) the agency advised the awardee in discussions that its price violated the solicitation's price target, though it did not, but never disclosed the upward adjustment it had made to correct the pricing error; (4) the awardee lowered its price in its final proposal, but repeated the pricing error it had made before; and (5) the agency selected that offeror for award after concluding that its significant price advantage offered the best value to the government. Thus, the record, as a whole, shows that the flawed discussions led the awardee to significantly lower its price, and the selection decision turned on the price differential between awardee and the protester. 2. Protester's contention that the agency failed to evaluate price proposals for completeness is sustained where the record shows that: (1) the solicitation expressly advised that price proposals would be assessed for completeness, including an assessment of the traceability of price estimates, and required that offerors submit detailed pricing data showing the traceability of those estimates in a work breakdown structure; (2) the agency never performed the completeness review; and (3) it is reasonable to conclude that, had it not been compelled to structure its proposal to comply with this solicitation requirement, the protester

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