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

B-274768 1 (1997-01-02)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptafrd0001 and id is 1 raw text is: oComptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE A protected decision was issued on the date below and was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been redacted or approved by the parties involved for public release. Matter of: Cubic Applications, Inc. File: B-274768; B-274768.2; B-274768.3 Date: January 2, 1997 James J. McCullough, Esq., Joel R. Feidelman, Esq., Deneen J. Melander, Esq., James S. Kennell, Esq., and Nancy R. Wagner, Esq., Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, for the protester. Michael A. Gordon, Esq., and Fran Baskin, Esq., Holmes, Schwartz & Gordon, for Logicon RDA, an intervenor. Nicholas P. Retson, Esq., Thomas J. Duffy, Esq., and Dana B. Current, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Peter A. Jannicelli, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Contracting agency properly awarded a contract for simulation support services to the offeror of the higher technically rated, higher evaluated cost proposal where: (1) the request for proposals stated that technical, management, and past performance factors were significantly more important than cost; (2) the agency reasonably evaluated proposals, resulting in the awardee's proposal being rated as equal to or better than the protester's proposal on each and every evaluation factor; and (3) the source selection authority determined that the overall technical superiority of the awardee's proposal justified the additional probable costs over the life of the contract. DECISION Cubic Applications, Inc. protests the award of a contract for battle simulation support services to Logicon RDA by the Department of the Army pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. DAJA22-95-R-0083. Cubic alleges that the evaluation of proposals and award decision were improper.1 We deny the protest. 1In its several submissions to this Office, Cubic raised a host of arguments and myriad examples to support its allegation that the evaluation and award decision were unreasonable and unfair; the Army responded to each argument, justifying its (continued...) 53637

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