10 U.S.C. § 2305(b)(1)). The contracting officer was required to “issue a written amendment to a solicitation when it ‘changes, relaxes, increases, or otherwise modifies its requirements,’ and to provide an opportunity for competitors to submit new or amended proposals when it prefers a proposal involving ‘a departure from the stated requirements.’ ” Id. (citing 48 C.F.R. § 15.606(c)). Similar problems arose in the course of this procurement. The Government relaxed or waived requirements of its solicitation and thereby enabled Strong Vessel to win the contract. This affected plaintiffs direct economic interest because otherwise it likely would have been the winning offeror. Plaintiff is an interested party within the meaning of section 1491(b)(1). E.g., Alfa Laval, 175 F.3d at 1367 (<HOLDING>) (quoting Statistica, Inc. v. Christopher, 102
holding that a protester must show that the governments error in a bid evaluation was so significant that the government had no reasonable basis for its best value determination holding that a contractor lacked standing because it failed to show a substantial chance it would have received the contract award but for agency error holding that a protester must show only that there was a substantial chance it would have received the contract award but for that error holding that a contractor failed to show a substantial chance it would have received the contract award but for agency error holding that a defendant must show reasonable probability that but for the error he would not have entered the plea