[Protest of Army Contract Award for Travel Offices]

A firm protested an Army contract award for travel office management, contending that the: (1) solicitation specifications were defective; (2) awardee's contract would unlawfully divert appropriated funds to a nonappropriated fund instrumentality; (3) Army improperly evaluated the technical proposals; and (4) Army improperly permitted a conflict of interest in the bid evaluation. GAO held that: (1) the protester untimely filed after bid opening its protest regarding alleged solicitation improprieties; (2) the protest issue was not of sufficient interest to warrant consideration under the significant-issue exception to the protest timeliness requirements; (3) the protester did not provide sufficient factual information to support its allegations of improper agency action; (4) the allegation concerning unlawful diversion of appropriated funds did not constitute a valid protest basis; and (5) there was no evidence of any bias towards the awardee. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.