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

B-277270 1 (1997-09-23)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptagbr0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 


oComptroller General
             of the United States
             Washington, D.C. 20548

             Decision                                  DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
                                                     The decision issued on the date below was subject to a I
                                                     GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been
                                                     approved for public release.



             Matter of: Environmental Affairs Management, Inc.

             File:        B-277270

             Date:        September 23, 1997

             Kent R. Minshall, Jr., Esq., for the protester.
             James J. McCullough, Esq., James S. Kennell, Esq., and Douglas R. M. King, Esq.,
             Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, for Science Applications International
             Corporation, an intervenor.
             Richard N. Wolf, Esq., and Laura Henry, Esq., National Aeronautics and Space
             Administration, for the agency.
             Peter Jannicelli, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel,
             GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
             DIGEST

             1. Protest alleging that agency officials provided the awardee inside information
             that gave it a competitive advantage and that evaluators were biased in favor of the
             awardee is denied where the protester has provided no detail to substantiate its
             allegations and there is nothing in the record to support them.

             2. Protest alleging that agency improperly made an upward adjustment to the
             protester's proposed costs to reflect the agency's estimate of the amount of a
             reasonable award fee, without first discussing the matter with the protester is
             denied where: (1) the RFP was for a cost-plus-award-fee contract and clearly
             indicated that offers should include an award fee, but the protester's offer did not
             do so; (2) the agency considered the award fee a key element for ensuring excellent
             performance; (3) the RFP cautioned that the agency intended to award the contract
             on the basis of initial proposals without discussions; (4) the protester has indicated
             that it intended to propose an award fee if the subject had been raised during
             discussions; and (5) the agency reasonably estimated the protester's award fee
             based upon the median percentage for award fees contained in other proposals.

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