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/gaocrptauby0001 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: MASAI Technologies Corporation
File: B-298880.3, B-298880.4
Date: September 10, 2007
Janine S. Benton, Esq., and Kathy C. Potter, Esq., Benton & Potter PC, for the
protester.
Kenneth D. Brody, Esq., and Thomas K. David, Esq., David Brody & Dondershine,
LLP, for Denysys Corp., an intervenor.
Maj. ChristinaLynn E. McCoy, Department of the Army, for the agency.
Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Ralph 0. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel,
GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
1. Agency reasonably determined that protester's proposal failed to comply with
solicitation requirements regarding personnel qualifications, properly evaluating
protester's proposal as [deleted] under that evaluation factor.
2. Agency's review of protester's and awardee's prior activities to assess whether
potential conflicts of interest existed reasonably supports agency's conclusion that
awardee did not have an unfair competitive advantage.
DECISION
MASAI Technologies Corporation (MTC) protests the Department of the Army's
award of a contract to Denysys Corporation pursuant to request for quotations
(RFQ) No. W81XWH-06-T-02857' to provide computer and technical support for the
'Although the solicitation is identified on its cover page as an RFQ, the term
proposal, as opposed to quotation, appears repeatedly throughout the solicitation
and the procurement record. As discussed below, the solicitation contemplated an
evaluation and source selection scheme similar to those used in negotiated
procurements; accordingly whether the vendors' submissions are referred to as
proposals or quotations has no effect on the issues raised. See, e.g., LexisNexis,
B-299381, Apr. 17, 2007, 2007 CPD 73 at n.1; GC Servs., Ltd. P'shiD, B-298102,
B-298102.3, June 14, 2006, 2006 CPD 96 at n.1. For the sake of consistency, we
(continued...)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaocrptauby0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)