About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-186311.2 1 (1981-11-30)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadjxa0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 



                                        \ TH11[ COMfPTPOL-I-IBF EN!!PA I

                  UD:ECISION        fw    oF'-' ra. ! , THim U NI!TC9I13 8TAT11,!8
                                      W A S I- 1 N Q T 0 N D. C, R I B
                                         2'o





                                     SNovember 30, t981
                    FIh:  B-18631192           OAT E:oebr3,18
                  MATTER OF: University Research Corporation

                  DIGEST:



                       claimant is not entitled to recover proposal
                       proparation-costs because procuring agency's
                       postaward, cost realism analysts indicates
                       that claimant's proposal would not have bpen
                       the best buy for the Government, Therefore,
                       the claimant did not have a substantial
                       chance of receiving the award and the
                       claimant was not prejudiced or damaged.

                       University Research corporation (URC) requi,sts
                  reconsideration of our decision in the matter of
                  University Research Corporation--Reconsideration,
                  B9186311, June 22, 1978, 78-1 CPD 450. That decision
                  was the fourth in a series of decisions which have
                  denied IRC'O claim in the amount of $35,093.02 for
                  proposal preparation costs i.n connection with request
                  for proposals No. L/A 76-9 issued by the Department.
                  of Labor for furnishing certain technival assistance.

                       URC argues that, under a recent Court of Claims
                  devision, URC is entitled to proposal preparation
                  costs becaune there was a substantial cbnce that
                  it would have received the award. Labor essentially
                  argues that URC has presented nothing new and the
1 41prior decision should be affirme6.               We conclude that
   t              URC is not entitled to proposal p:'eparation costs
                  because a selection based on a proper cost reulism
                  analysis would not have resulted in award to URC;
                  thus, URC was not damaged.









It ,

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:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most