The Department of Defense source selection process for negotiated acquisitions has been plagued by charges of unfair competition and unsound business practices for years. Beginning with the Harvard Weapons Acquisition project in 1962, continuing with various Industry studies in the 1960's through the findings of the Commission on Government Procurement released in the early 1970's, DOD weapon systems acquisition procedures have come under close scrutiny and increased criticism. Past statutes have failed to control, and even encouraged such practices as 'technical leveling, ' 'technical transfusion, ' 'auctioning, ' and 'buy-ins.' Poorly written Requests for Proposal have added to the confusion and uncertainty surrounding the source selection process. In 1976, DOD began a two year test study of a source selection method called 'Four-Step' which had been adapted from NASA procedures. The four steps in the process were (1) submission and evaluation of technical proposals; (2) submission and evaluation of cost proposals as well as revisions to technical proposals; (3) the establishment of a common cut-off date for 'best and final' offers and selection of the apparent winning contractor; and (4) negotiation and award of a definitive contract. This study looks at current procedures and the history of continuing problems. The probable effects of the new Four-Step procedures on those problems are then analyzed. Finally recommendations are presented for changes to the new DAR 4-107 text adopted in October 1978. (Author).