Southwest Range Services, LLC (W9124R-24-R-0004)

B-423843,B-423843.2 Jan 09, 2026 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Southwest Range Services, LLC, a joint venture (JV) of Las Cruces, New Mexico, protests the award of a contract to TRAX International Corporation, of Las Vegas, Nevada, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W9124R24R0004, issued by the Department of the Army for support services at three Army test centers. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of proposals and source selection decision. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Southwest Range Services, LLC File: B-423843; B-423843.2 Date: January 9, 2026 Craig A. Holman, Esq., Stuart W. Turner, Esq., and Kyung Liu‑Katz, Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, for the protester. Daniel P. Graham, Esq., McDermott Will & Schulte, for TRAX International, Corp., the intervenor. Major Paul J. Blenz, and Captain Lindsay M. DeFer, Department of the Army, for the agency. Christopher Alwood, Esq., and Alexander O. Levine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging agency's evaluation of proposals under solicitation's management factor is denied where the agency's evaluation was reasonable, sufficiently documented, and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria. 2. Protest challenging agency's evaluation of past performance is denied where the protester identified a clear error in the agency's evaluation but could not demonstrate that it was competitively prejudiced by the agency's actions. 3. Protest challenging agency's best-value tradeoff and source selection decision is denied where the agency's comparative analysis and source selection decision were reasonable, adequately documented, and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Southwest Range Services, LLC, a joint venture (JV) of Las Cruces, New Mexico, protests the award of a contract to TRAX International Corporation, of Las Vegas, Nevada, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W9124R24R0004, issued by the Department of the Army for support services at three Army test centers. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of proposals and source selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On July 16, 2024, the Army issued the solicitation using the negotiated procurement policies and procedures established under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, seeking proposals to provide mission test support services (MTSS) at the Army's Yuma Test Center in Yuma, Arizona, the Arctic Regions Test Center in Junction, Alaska, and the Tropical Regions Test Center in Panama. Agency Report (AR), Tab 69, RFP at 1, 129; AR, Tab 38, RFP, amend. 0002, attach. 1, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 8.[1] The solicitation contemplated the award of an indefinite‑delivery, indefinite‑quantity contract with cost‑plus‑fixed‑fee, cost-reimbursement, and fixed‑price contract line item numbers (CLINs) for a 5‑year base period and two 1‑year option periods. RFP at 3‑13; Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1. The RFP established that award would be made on a best‑value tradeoff basis, considering four factors in descending order of importance: management, past performance, small business participation, and cost. RFP at 129, 132-133. Additionally, the management factor consisted of two subfactors, staffing plan and transition plan.[2] Id. at 132. The RFP provided that the agency would evaluate proposals under the management factor to assess offerors' proposed staffing and transition approaches and the extent to which the proposals demonstrated an understanding of the solicitation's requirements. Id. at 133. The RFP specified six aspects of proposed staffing plans and three aspects of proposed transition plans the agency was to evaluate.[3] As relevant to this decision, RFP section L.4.1.1.1 instructed offerors to identify proposed potential strengths and explain what specific solicitation requirement each potential strength exceeded. Id. at 111. Section M.5 of the RFP specified that the agency would evaluate “the proposed potential advantages identified” by the offerors to determine whether they provide advantages over and above the requirements of the PWS. Id. at 133. The agency was to evaluate the offerors' past performance to assess the relative risks and the offerors' likelihood of success in performing the solicitation's requirements. Id. at 135. The RFP stated that the agency would consider the recency, relevancy, and quality of each offeror's past performance.[4] Id. at 136. With regard to relevance, the solicitation specified that “more relevant past performance is a stronger predictor of future success” and would have greater influence in the evaluation than less relevant past performance.