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

B-284854 1 (2000-06-12)

handle is hein.gao/gaocrptalbp0001 and id is 1 raw text is: -e GeAtOa E Comptroller General of the United States United States General Accounting 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: Information Network Systems, Inc. File: B-284854; B-284854.2 Date: June 12, 2000 Kevin P. Connelly, Esq., John C. Lavorato, Esq., and, Michael D. Garson, Esq., Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, for the protester. Charles W. Mahan, Esq., Dunlevey, Mahan & Furry, for MacAulay Brown, Inc., an intervenor. Gregory H. Petkoff, Esq., Sharon A. Jenks, Esq., and William Landsberg, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Ralph 0. White, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that discussions were not meaningful is denied where the record shows that the agency's questions clearly indicated that certain proposed labor rates were considered too low, and identified the evaluators' concerns that these rates could have an adverse impact on workforce retention. 2. In evaluation of offers for a service contract where the agency placed a strong premium on retaining the incumbent workforce, protester's contention that the agency unreasonably assessed its proposal as high risk under workforce retention subfactor is denied where the evaluation was made in accordance with stated evaluation criteria, and where the record shows that the protester's proposed labor rates are lower than those rates paid to incumbent employees under the previous contracts, and the proposal contained seemingly inconsistent promises to retain 100 percent of all incumbent personnel with salaries at, or above, their previous level, and to do so without exceeding proposed costs. 3. Contention that a tradeoff decision violated the stated evaluation scheme because the selection official concluded that the protester's advantage under the most important evaluation factor was outweighed by the proposals high risk under a less important evaluation subfactor is denied where the selection official reasonably concluded that the difference between the two proposals under the most important evaluation factor was relatively insignificant, while a detailed review of the two

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