[Protests of Army Contract Awards for Ordnance Test and Evaluation Support Services]

Two firms protested Army contract awards for ordnance test and evaluation support services, contending that the Army's cost/technical tradeoff decisions resulted in awards to significantly higher bidders. GAO held that the cost/technical tradeoff decisions were unreasonable, since the: (1) contracting officer unreasonably applied the solicitation's evaluation methodology; (2) decisions were not supported by the evaluation and source selection documentation; and (3) Army failed to address key issues during discussions. Accordingly, the protests were sustained and GAO recommended that the Army: (1) reopen discussions with all bidders in the competitive range; (2) properly evaluate the revised bids and make award to the bidders who propose the best value to the government; and (3) reimburse the protesters for their protest costs.