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

B-278030 1 (1997-12-19)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptageg0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 


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




             Matter of: Southern Technologies, Inc.

             File:       B-278030; B-278030.2

             Date:       December 19, 1997

             James V. Etscorn, Esq., Baker & Hostetler, for the protester.
             Charles G. Lill for Frank Lill & Son, Inc., an intervenor.
             Ann Giddings, Esq., and Us B. Young, Esq., Naval Facilities Engineering Command,
             for the agency.
             Jennifer Westfall-Mc Grail, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General
             Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
             DIGEST

             Protester's objection to corrective action proposed by contracting agency in
             response to protest--i.e., paying protester's proposal preparation costs--is without
             merit where, although agency acknowledges that the solicitation specifications were
             misleading, agency demonstrates that, due to urgency of the requirement, alternate
             corrective action requested by protester--recompeting with revised specifications--is
             not feasible.
             DECISION

             Southern Technologies, Inc. objects to the corrective action proposed by the
             Department of the Navy in response to Southern's protest of the rejection of its
             proposal under request for proposals (RFP) No. N62477-97-R-0041. The Navy
             decided not to reopen the competition, as requested by Southern, but instead to pay
             Southern its proposal preparation costs as compensation for the agency's improper
             actions in conducting the procurement. The protester contends that the agency
             should reopen the competition since reopening is a practicable, and more
             meaningful, remedy for the impropriety that occurred.

             We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part.

             BACKGROUND

             The RFP, which was issued on May 28, 1997, solicited proposals for power plant
             improvements at the Goddard Power Plant in Indian Head, Maryland. The purpose
             of the improvements is to bring the plant, which is a major emitter of nitrogen
             oxides (NOx), into compliance with emission standards set by the state of
             Maryland. Work to be performed includes the installation of low NOx coal/oil fired

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