B-228410:
Dec 16, 1987
A firm protested an Army contract award for data collection, contending that the Army: (1) improperly evaluated its proposal; (2) did not hold adequate discussions with it; and (3) should have awarded it the contract, since its bid was technically superior and low. GAO held that the Army: (1) properly evaluated bids using its own estimated costs; (2) was not required to conduct discussions with th...