[Protest of Army Corps of Engineers Contract Award for Debris Removal]

A firm protested an Army Corps of Engineers contract award for debris removal, contending that: (1) the awardee's bid was materially unbalanced; (2) the award constituted an improper advance payment; and (3) the awardee's bid did not comply with the solicitation's limitation on the use of subcontractor employees. GAO held that the: (1) awardee's bid was not mathematically or materially unbalanced, since the awardee's high mobilization costs did not constitute a disproportionate share of its bid; (2) award did not result in an improper advance payment; (3) Corps reasonably determined that the awardee's bid complied with the subcontractor limitation; and (4) awardee's compliance with the subcontracting specification was a matter of contract administration and not subject to GAO review. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.