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

LOG IN
LOG IN


B-418184 1 (2020-01-21)

handle is hein.gao/gaobaeanr0001 and id is 1 raw text is: GAO U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 441 G St. N.W. Comptroller General Washington, DC 20548 of the United States DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to Decision a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of: Absolute Business Solutions, Inc. File: B-418184 Date: January 21, 2020 Lee Dougherty, Esq., Effectus, PLLC, for the protester. David Edelstein, Esq., Laurence Schor, Esq., and Allison Geewax, Esq., Asmar, Schor & McKenna, PLLC, for The Buffalo Group, the intervenor. Scott N. Flesch, Esq., Harry M. Parent, Esq., Lieutenant Colonel Stephen Hernandez, and Captain Jeremy D. Burkhart, Department of the Army, for the agency. Robert T. Wu, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the agency failed to consider the awardee's alleged organizational conflict of interest is denied where the protester's allegation amounts to a dispute between private parties, which our Office will not review. 2. Protest challenging the agency's evaluation of the protester's proposal under the technical and management factors is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria. 3. Protest that the agency's cost realism analysis of the awardee's proposal was unreasonable is denied where the record shows that evaluation was reasonable. DECISION Absolute Business Solutions, Inc. (ABS), of Herndon, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to The Buffalo Group (TBG), of Reston, Virginia, under request for task order proposals (RTOP) No. W91 1W4-19-R-IIS1 issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, for intelligence support services. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably failed to evaluate the awardee's alleged organizational conflict of interest (OCI), and challenges the evaluation of proposals under the cost and non-cost factors. We deny the protest.