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 2016-06-23 U.S. Government Publishing Office 2008-03-03 monographic deposited born digital 6 p. GA 1.13:B-310661.3 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3 P0b002ee18fd4a2e0 f:3106613 DGPO 2016-06-23 2016-06-23 GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3 machine generated eng fdlp COMPTROLLERDECISION GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3 B-310661.3 Comptroller General Decision 1. Protest that agency unreasonably rated awardee's technical proposal acceptable despite eight weaknesses and only three strengths is denied where determination of acceptability was not based solely on number of strengths versus weaknesses and protester does not argue that awardee's proposal did not satisfy any of the criteria agency applied.<p/> 2. Assertion that protester's proposal should have been rated good rather than acceptable under one management subfactor is denied where record demonstrates that evaluators reasonably assigned acceptable rating and, in any case, conclusion that awardee's proposal was superior under management factor was based, not solely on adjectival ratings under subfactors, but on source selection official's consideration of underlying strengths and weaknesses of protester's and awardee's proposals.<p/> 3. Protest that "best value" determination was unreasonable is denied where, in determining that protester's technically superior proposal was not worth a 30 percent price premium, source selection official specifically considered proposals' ratings under each factor and subfactor, weight accorded each factor, and proposals' underlying strengths and weaknesses.<p/> 4. Protest that awardee's proposal to recruit spouses of transferred government personnel created improper conflict of interest due to potential for unduly favorable consideration from evaluators is denied where proposal was general in nature and did not identify individuals that could be affected, and there is no other evidence or reason to believe that evaluators were unduly influenced. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3/html/GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3/pdf/GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3.pdf GAO/B-310661.3 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-B-310661-3 Comptroller General Decision GAO/B-310661.3; B-310661.3; B-310661.4, Karrar Systems Corporation, March 3, 2008;