Protest of Army's Determination To Perform Services In-House
B-202977.2: Feb 22, 1982
- Full Report:
A firm protested the Army's decision to cancel an invitation for bids. The determination to cancel was based upon a cost comparison analysis from which it was concluded that the work could be performed at a lower cost to the Government through continued use of Government personnel rather than by a contractor. The protester contended that the cost comparison did not comply with applicable Army policies and procedures. Where an agency uses the procurement system to aid in its decisionmaking and spells out in the solicitation the circumstances under which the Government will award a contract, GAO will review whether the mandated procedures were followed in comparing in-house and contract costs. The protester maintained that: (1) the cost comparison worksheet entries were incorrect; (2) the cost of contracting was overstated; and (3) the Army improperly did not deduct any amount for Government-furnished property, the full amount of one-time conversions, or the full amount of general and administrative expense on its worksheets. GAO found that the Army's cost comparison was not faulty in the respects contended by the protester and that the Army complied with the mandated procedures. Accordingly, the protest was denied.