United States Government Publishing Office publisher pbl distributor dst United States Government Accountability Office author aut Government Organization text government publication eng GAOREPORTS Legislative Agency Publications gao_comptroller_general legislative 2010-12-28 U.S. Government Printing Office 1995-06-13 monographic deposited born digital 17 p. GA 1.13:B-259920.2 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2 P0b002ee180b9bc0e f:2599202 DGPO 2010-12-28 2011-12-29 GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2 machine generated eng fdlp COMPTROLLERDECISION GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2 B-259920.2 Comptroller General Decision 1. Protester's contention that the agency conducted an unreasonable cost realism review of the awardee's proposed cuts to pay and benefits is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably concluded that the proposed cost savings should be accepted because the awardee would be able to unilaterally impose such cost-savings measures on its employees, and where the record also shows that the agency adequately reflected its concerns about the effects of the pay cuts in its decision to downgrade the awardee's technical proposal in two separate areas.<p/>2. Challenge to agency's decision to accept the awardee's level of proposed uncompensated overtime is sustained where the record shows that despite the submission of a signed certification from every employee promising to voluntarily perform [DELETED] hours of uncompensated overtime each week, the agency did not consider the fact that the awardee intended to announce on the day of contract award significant reductions in pay rates and fringe benefits, calling into question the continued willingness of the existing employees to voluntarily work additional hours without compensation. The challenge is also sustained because the record suggests that over the life of the contract the rate of employee turnover will be higher than estimated and that the newly hired employees will have even less incentive to provide uncompensated overtime than existing employees.<p/>3. Protester's contention that the agency conducted an improper evaluation of technical proposals is denied where the record shows that the agency review was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria.<p/>4. Argument that agency should have awarded to protester on the strength of its initial proposal, and should have excluded the awardee from the competitive range, is denied where the protester makes no showing that the agency acted unreasonably in including the awardee's proposal in the competitive range and holding negotiations. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2/html/GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2/pdf/GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2.pdf GAO/B-259920.2 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-B-259920-2 Comptroller General Decision GAO/B-259920.2; Matter of: Combat Systems Development Associates Joint Venture;