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

B-310661.3 1 (2008-03-03)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptavxk0001 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: Karrar Systems Corporation File: B-310661.3; B-310661.4 Date: March 3, 2008 Kevin P. Connelly, Esq., Seyfarth, Shaw, LLP, for the protester. Ross Aboff, Esq., Archer & Greiner, for BANC3, Inc., an intervenor. Daniel Pantzer, Esq., Denise M. Marrama, Esq., and James F. Ford, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Mary G. Curcio, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that agency unreasonably rated awardee's technical proposal acceptable despite eight weaknesses and only three strengths is denied where determination of acceptability was not based solely on number of strengths versus weaknesses and protester does not argue that awardee's proposal did not satisfy any of the criteria agency applied. 2. Assertion that protester's proposal should have been rated good rather than acceptable under one management subfactor is denied where record demonstrates that evaluators reasonably assigned acceptable rating and, in any case, conclusion that awardee's proposal was superior under management factor was based, not solely on adjectival ratings under subfactors, but on source selection official's consideration of underlying strengths and weaknesses of protester's and awardee's proposals. 3. Protest that best value determination was unreasonable is denied where, in determining that protester's technically superior proposal was not worth a 30 percent price premium, source selection official specifically considered proposals' ratings under each factor and subfactor, weight accorded each factor, and proposals' underlying strengths and weaknesses. 4. Protest that awardee's proposal to recruit spouses of transferred government personnel created improper conflict of interest due to potential for unduly favorable consideration from evaluators is denied where proposal was general in nature and

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