Skip to main content

Lapse in Appropriations

Please note that a lapse in appropriations has caused GAO to shut down its operations. Therefore, GAO will not be able to publish reports or otherwise update this website until GAO resumes operations. In addition, the vast majority of GAO personnel are not permitted to work. Consequently, calls or emails to agency personnel may not be returned until GAO resumes operations. For details on how the bid protest process will be handled during the shutdown, please see the legal decisions page. For information related to the GAO Personnel Appeals Board (PAB), please see the PAB webpage.

Protest of Proposal Rejection for Organizational Conflict of Interest

B-193497 Published: May 10, 1979. Publicly Released: May 10, 1979.
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

An offeror protested the refusal by the Department of Energy (DOE) to consider its proposal for award under a request for proposals (RFP) for technical consulting and management support services. DOE disqualified the protester and awarded the contract to another firm because it determined that conflict of interest existed for the protester and its subcontractor. The RFP required the submission of a disclosure statement regarding organizational conflicts of interest, a necessary prerequisite for the consideration of a proposal. DOE believed that an actual or potential conflict of interest existed because the protester's close corporate ties with the natural gas industry. The recommendation to disqualify the protester stated that many members of the board of trustees and a majority of its executive committee included officials of gas and oil companies. The protester argued that its disqualification was an improper and arbitrary action based on faulty interpretation of the protester's purpose and operational constraints. The protester's allegation that DOE failed to consider fully the statutory and regulatory constraints on the protester to act in the public interest was not supported by the record. The protester submitted no evidence for this statement. It was unnecessary to address the protest against disqualification of the subcontractor for failure to comply with the interest provisions in the RFP. The protest was denied.

Full Report

Media Inquiries

Sarah Kaczmarek
Managing Director
Office of Public Affairs

Public Inquiries