[Protest of Army Contract Award for Radio Antenna Kits]

A firm protested an Army contract award for radio antenna kits, contending that the Army: (1) misled it with erroneous oral advice; (2) improperly evaluated its bid; (3) awarded the contract at a significantly higher cost; and (4) failed to timely provide notice of award. GAO held that the: (1) alleged oral advice did not place the protester at a competitive disadvantage; (2) Army's downgrading of the protester's bid under 1 of 19 subcriteria did not materially affect the source selection decision; (3) Army properly followed the specified evaluation scheme; (4) Army reasonably concluded that the awardee's technical superiority outweighed the protester's lower bid; and (5) Army's failure to timely provide notice of award did not prejudice the protester, since its protest regarding the awardee's size status under the small business set-aside was pending and would be applicable to the instant procurement. Accordingly, the protest was denied.