[Protests of Army Contract and Subcontract Awards for Intercoms]

B-250699,B-250699.3,B-250699.6,B-250699.7: Feb 17, 1993

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested an Army Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM) subcontract award and an Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM) contract award for intercoms, contending that: (1) CECOM allowed the awardee an improper competitive advantage by giving it information at allegedly secret meetings; (2) CECOM excluded it from the meetings because it had an Israeli licensor and thereby participated in an illegal boycott of Israel; (3) the Army intended to meet TACOM foreign military sales (FMS) requirements by exercising options under the CECOM contract; and (4) the Army failed to follow mandatory FMS procedures in the TACOM award. GAO held that: (1) the Army received proper written direction from Saudi Arabia, the FMS purchaser, in making the sole-source designation; (2) there was no evidence of an illegal boycott of Israel; (3) CECOM did not treat bidders unequally, since the meetings were not secret and the Army showed no bias in favor of the awardee; (4) the awardee did not have an unfair competitive advantage by knowing of the subcontract award, since that award was proper; and (5) the awardee did not violate procurement integrity requirements, since it did not receive any improper information. GAO also held that a firm which also protested the CECOM award on similar grounds was not sufficiently interested to protest, since it had been eliminated from the competitive range. Accordingly, the protests were denied.

Oct 30, 2020

Oct 29, 2020

Oct 28, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here