[Protest of Army Contract Award]

A firm protested an Army contract award, contending that the awardee's bid prices: (1) were too low; and (2) failed to account for a collective bargaining agreement wage escalation rate, other fringe benefits, and certain contractual and legal requirements. GAO held that the: (1) protester failed to provide a valid basis of protest, since the awardee could propose an extremely low bid price; and (2) Army's acceptance of the awardee's bid price was an affirmative determination of the awardee's responsibility which it would not review, since the protester failed to show that the Army acted in bad faith or failed to follow definitive responsibility criteria. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.