[Protest of Army Contract Award for Battle Simulation Services]
Highlights
A firm protested a Department of the Army contract award for battle simulation services, contending that the Army: (1) improperly refused to accept two of the protester's proposed personnel cost reductions; (2) underestimated the awardee's proposed personnel costs; (3) improperly evaluated the awardee's past performance; and (4) improperly evaluated the bidders' proposed personnel qualifications. GAO held that the Army: (1) reasonably rejected two of the protester's proposed cost reductions, since they were based on erroneous assumptions; (2) properly evaluated the awardee's proposed personnel costs; (3) reasonably evaluated the awardee's past performance; (4) reasonably evaluated the qualifications of the bidders' proposed personnel. Accordingly, the protest was denied.
B-170078, SEP. 11, 1970
TRANSPORTATION -- DEPENDENTS -- PER DIEM DECISION SUSTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF EMPLOYEE'S CLAIM FOR TRAVEL, TRANSPORTATION AND RELOCATION EXPENSE INCIDENT TO SEPARATION FROM OVERSEAS STATION AND TRANSFER TO ANOTHER AGENCY. NAVY EMPLOYEE WHO WITH FAMILY RETURNED FOR SEPARATION FROM BANGKOK, THAILAND, TO COLUMBUS, GA., AND WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE TRANSFERRED TO FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION IN CHICAGO, MAY NOT BE ALLOWED PER DIEM FOR FAMILY'S RETURN SINCE EMPLOYEE WAS NOT PLACED ON ROLLS OVERSEAS SO THAT TRANSPORTATION COULD BE REGARDED AS INCIDENT TO TRANSFER FOR PER DIEM PURPOSES. WITH RESPECT TO CLAIM FOR PER DIEM FOR FAMILY'S TRAVEL FROM COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, TO CHICAGO, ILL., SINCE DISTANCE FROM BANGKOK TO COLUMBUS IS GREATER THAN FROM BANGKOK TO CHICAGO, PER DIEM AND MILEAGE MAY NOT BE ALLOWED.
TO MR. CHARLES W. WILSON:
WE REFER FURTHER TO YOUR LETTERS OF MAY 10 AND 12, 1970, REQUESTING REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT ACTIONS OF OUR OFFICE ON YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL, TRANSPORTATION AND RELOCATION EXPENSES INCIDENT TO YOUR SEPARATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY--LAST DUTY STATION BANGKOK, THAILAND--AND TRANSFER TO THE FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.
THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU TRAVELED WITH YOUR FAMILY FROM BANGKOK, THAILAND--DUTY STATION KAMPHAENG SAEN--TO COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, AS AUTHORIZED BY NAVY TRAVEL ORDER T-0643-69 DATED MAY 9, 1969. EFFECTIVE JUNE 29, 1969, WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE YOU TRANSFERRED TO THE FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.
THE ITEMS DENIED BY OUR SETTLEMENT ACTIONS ON YOUR CLAIM CONSIST OF PER DIEM FOR YOUR WIFE AND SON DURING THE PERIOD JUNE 8-15, 1969, WHILE ACCOMPANYING YOU FROM BANGKOK, THAILAND, TO COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, AND PER DIEM FOR YOUR WIFE AND SON AND MILEAGE FOR TRAVEL FROM COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, TO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.
WITH RESPECT TO YOUR CLAIM FOR PER DIEM FOR YOUR WIFE AND SON ON YOUR RETURN FROM BANGKOK, OUR SETTLEMENT POINTED OUT THAT SINCE THE TRAVEL WAS INCIDENT TO YOUR RETURN FOR SEPARATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, PER DIEM ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF AN EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY ARE NOT AUTHORIZED. WE POINT OUT THAT IF YOU HAD ACTUALLY BEEN PLACED ON THE ROLLS OF THE FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION BEFORE YOU LEFT BANGKOK THE ENTIRE TRAVEL WOULD HAVE BEEN REGARDED AS HAVING BEEN PERFORMED INCIDENT TO A TRANSFER AND PER DIEM WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWABLE FOR YOUR FAMILY. HOWEVER, UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED TO THE TRAVEL COSTS AND PER DIEM FOR DIRECT TRAVEL TO CHICAGO AND WOULD HAVE HAD TO PAY YOUR OWN EXPENSE FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOURSELF AND FAMILY ON TO COLUMBUS, GEORGIA.
WITH RESPECT TO YOUR CLAIM FOR PER DIEM FOR YOUR FAMILY AND MILEAGE FOR THE TRAVEL FROM COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, TO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, WE ENCLOSE A COPY OF OUR DECISION B-160565, DATED JUNE 21, 1968, PUBLISHED IN 47 COMP. GEN. 763. THAT DECISION HOLDS THAT AN EMPLOYEE UNDER SEPARATION ORDERS TO A PLACE OF RESIDENCE WHICH IS GREATER DISTANCE FROM HIS OVERSEAS STATION THAN THE PLACE AT WHICH HE IS EMPLOYED (WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE) AFTER DEPARTURE FROM HIS OVERSEAS DUTY POINT IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRAVEL OR TRANSPORTATION COSTS FROM HIS RESIDENCE TO HIS NEW DUTY STATION, NOR IS A PER DIEM ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FOR HIS FAMILY ALLOWABLE. AS NOTED ON ONE OF THE SETTLEMENTS IN YOUR CASE THE DISTANCE FROM BANGKOK TO COLUMBUS IS GREATER THAN THE DISTANCE FROM BANGKOK TO CHICAGO WHICH PRECLUDES ANY ALLOWANCE FOR SUCH TRAVEL.
THE FACT THAT YOU MAY HAVE BEEN UNAWARE OF THE REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE MATTER DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY BASIS TO REIMBURSE YOU IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT PROPERLY AUTHORIZED THEREUNDER. ACCORDINGLY, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN THE CLAIM SETTLEMENT ACTION AS MADE.