Summary: In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed a firm's allegations concerning the Air Force's reprocurement of a centrifuge trainer to determine: (1) whether the awardee's sale to the Air Force of the trainer originally manufactured for the government of Turkey and financed with Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program credits was consistent with the FMS program; (2) whether the Air Force assisted the awardee in obtaining the release of the trainer from Turkey; (3) whether the awardee violated federal regulations in providing used equipment; and (4) why the Air Force did not award the contract to the low bidder.
GAO found that the: (1) protester provided no rationale to support its allegation that the sale was inconsistent with the program; (2) Air Force was not a party to the trainer sale; (3) Air Force considered the trainer new, since the limited operation for training and demonstration purposes did not classify it as used; and (4) Air Force properly determined that the awardee best satisfied its needs, since price was only one of four evaluation factors.
