[Protest of Army Contract Award for Unscheduled Maintenance Data Sample Collection Services]

A firm protested an Army contract award for unscheduled maintenance data sample collection services, contending that the: (1) awardee's bid failed to conform to the solicitation's pricing structure in several aspects; (2) awardee's provision for the reimbursement of contractor travel costs violated statutory prohibition against awarding a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost (CPPC) contract; and (3) Army improperly awarded the contract without considering cost in its bid evaluations. GAO held that the: (1) Army reasonably awarded the contract to the technically superior bidder, even though its bid was not low; (2) awardee's bid exceeded, but was not inconsistent with, the solicitation specifications; (3) protester failed to show that the awardee's bid prices were unreasonable; and (4) bid's travel reimbursement portion did not constitute a CPPC contract, since the contract provided that travel requests were subject to government approval. Accordingly, the protest was denied.