[Protests of Department of State Contract Awards for Moving and Storage Services]

Two firms protested Department of State contract awards for moving and storage services, contending that: (1) some of the awardees were ineligible for award; and (2) State did not evaluate bids and make award in accordance with the solicitation's specifications. GAO held that: (1) one of the awardees' use of a joint venture interstate license did not render it ineligible for award; (2) awards to the affiliated bidders did not prejudice the other bidders; (3) State failed to make separate awards for two related services; (4) State unreasonably evaluated the bids and improperly made award contrary to solicitation specifications; (5) State did not sufficiently document its contractor selection or its technical bid evaluations; (6) State improperly made award to a technically unacceptable bidder; and (7) one of the protesters was not sufficiently interested to protest, since it would not be in line for award even if its protest was sustained. Accordingly, one protest was denied and the other protest was denied in part and sustained in part and GAO recommended that State: (1) reject one of the awardees' bids as technically unacceptable and make award to the successful bidder; (2) separately evaluate the award for related services, document its evaluation and cost-technical tradeoff or amend the solicitation to specify the evaluation criteria, and obtain revised bids; and (3) reimburse the successful protester for its protest costs.