[Protest of Army Contract Award for Nontactical Radio System]

A firm protested an Army contract award for a radio system, contending that the Army: (1) improperly engaged in discussions with the awardee and allowed it to revise its proposal; and (2) did not hold discussions with all offerers in the competitive range. GAO held that: (1) the correspondence between the contracting officer and the offerer constituted discussions; and (2) since the contract was substantially completed and termination was not feasible, the Army should reimburse the protester for its bid and protest preparation costs. Accordingly, the protest was sustained.