TRAX International Corporation (W51EW7-25-R-A003)

B-424271,B-424271.2,B-424271.3 May 14, 2026 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights TRAX International Corporation, of Las Vegas, Nevada, protests the award of a contract to Southwest Range Services, LLC, of Las Cruces, New Mexico, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W51EW725RA003, issued by the Department of the Army for mission support services at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico. The protester contends that the agency failed to meaningfully consider and investigate Southwest Range's unmitigable organizational conflict of interest (OCI) and unreasonably evaluated proposals. We deny the protest. View Decision 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. Matter of: TRAX International Corporation File: B-424271; B-424271.2; B-424271.3 Date: May 14, 2026 Daniel P. Graham, Esq., Tara L. Ward, Esq., and Emily Fallin, Esq., McDermott Will & Schulte LLP, for the protester. Craig A. Holman, Esq., Stuart W. Turner, Esq., Thomas A. Pettit, Esq., and Kristina Lorch, Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, for Southwest Range Services, LLC, the intervenor. Major Joshua A. Reyes, Lieutenant Colonel Susan Kim, and Robert B. Neill, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Nathaniel S. Canfield, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the agency unreasonably investigated an alleged impaired objectivity organizational conflict of interest is denied where the record does not contain clear evidence showing that the investigation was unreasonable. 2. Protest that the agency improperly evaluated technical proposals is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably and equally evaluated proposals in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation criteria, and a conceded error did not competitively prejudice the protester. 3. Protest that the agency unreasonably found no meaningful distinction between proposals under the past performance factor is denied where the agency reasonably considered differences in the offerors' respective past performance, and even assuming that the agency improperly credited the awardee for the past performance of affiliate entities that were not clearly committed to perform on this contract, the protester cannot demonstrate a reasonable possibility of competitive prejudice. DECISION TRAX International Corporation, of Las Vegas, Nevada, protests the award of a contract to Southwest Range Services, LLC, of Las Cruces, New Mexico, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W51EW725RA003, issued by the Department of the Army for mission support services at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico. The protester contends that the agency failed to meaningfully consider and investigate Southwest Range's unmitigable organizational conflict of interest (OCI) and unreasonably evaluated proposals. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFP on May 23, 2025, pursuant to the negotiated contracting procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15 and amended it three times. Corrected Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1‑2. As explained in the RFP, WSMR is the largest open‑air land test range in the Department of Defense, with a large land mass and controlled airspace that allow for the testing and analysis of conventional munitions, unmanned systems, distributed testing, countermeasures, space systems and sensors, directed energy, high and low altitude missile systems testing, explosives testing, ground and aerial target flights, and low observable precision strikes. Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFP, attach. 1, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 1. The RFP sought proposals for the provision of engineering support services to the White Sands Test Center, which is a tenant on WSMR, in support of experimentation, test, research, assessment, development, and training in support of national security. Id. at 1, 2. The RFP contemplated award of a single cost‑plus‑fixed‑fee contract with a 3‑month phase‑in period, 9‑month base period, four 12‑month option periods, and a 6‑month option to extend services. COS at 1. The RFP provided for award of the contract on a tradeoff basis to the offeror whose proposal presented the best value to the agency considering four factors: (1) mission capability; (2) past performance; (3) small business participation; and (4) cost/price. AR, Tab 22, RFP, attach. 10, Section M at 1. The mission capability factor comprised two subfactors: management and staffing; and continuity of operations. Id. Within the mission capability factor, the management and staffing subfactor was significantly more important than the continuity of operations subfactor. Id.