[Protest of Army Contract Award for Integrated Hardware and Software Network]

A firm protested an Army contract award to two firms for an integrated hardware and software network, contending that: (1) notwithstanding Army verification, no joint venture for the contract work existed between the two firms; and (2) it was an interested party, since the second low bidder was a licensed distributor of its products. GAO held that: (1) the protester, the third low offerer, was not an interested party since it would not be in line for award even if the protest were sustained; and (2) a manufacturer of products to be supplied by a bidder was not an interested party. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.