[Protest of Army Contract Award for Transmitter Repairs]

A firm protested an Army contract award for the repair and retrofit of transmitters, contending that: (1) it should have been given an opportunity to prepare its proposal based on the actual evaluation approach, since it reasonably overlooked the unnumbered and unidentified pages in the solicitation; (2) improperly waived the first-article test requirement for the awardee; and (3) the awardee's lower price reflected the improper use of government-furnished material (GFM) from its current production contract. GAO held that: (1) the evaluation was consistent with the approach set forth in the solicitation; (2) the protester was on notice of the Army's intended evaluation approach, since the unnumbered and unidentified pages were included in the copy of the solicitation downloaded from the Internet and printed by the protester; (3) the Army's first-article test waiver for the awardee was unobjectionable; and (4) there was no evidence that the awardee planned to use GFM from its current contract. Accordingly, the protest was denied.