to companies that act as conduits to debarred contractors.” Def.-Intervenor’s Opp’n 9. In this case, the Corps initially determined that BBSSI’s proposal constituid ed the best value to the government. It also determined that BBSSI was “fully qualified” to perform the work encompassed by the JOC. Pl.’s App. 290. Based upon its interpretation of Dr. Cosmelli’s opinion, the Corps concluded that, while BBSSI was qualified to perform the work, BBSSI was nevertheless “also required” to utilize BBH’s resources. Id. The “public interest in honest, open, and fair competition in the procurement process is compromised whenever an agency abuses its discretion in evaluating a contractor’s bid.” Overstreet Elec. Co. v. United States, 47 Fed.Cl. 728, 744 (2000); Info. Scis. Corp., 80 Fed.Cl. at 799 (<HOLDING>); Beta Analytics Int’l, Inc. v. United States,
holding that the definition of procurement under the tucker act is broader than the definition of procurement contract in the fgcaa such that an agency can engage in a procurement process for the purposes of the tucker act even though it is using a cooperative agreement instead of a procurement contract to memorialize the parties agreement holding that without a valid reason for cancelling the procurement  the government violated its duty to conduct a fair procurement recognizing the publics interest in receiving the best value in public services recognizing the publics interest in ensuring that the ultimate awardee offers the best value to the government pursuant to the terms of the solicitation and applicable procurement regulations holding that a contracting officer has great discretion in best value procurement decisions