As we have previously covered on this blog, challenges to the terms of a solicitation typically must be raised in a bid protest brought prior to proposal submission.  The Government Accountability Office recently sustained such a pre-award protest in Selex ES, Inc., B-420799 (Sept. 6, 2022)

In Selex, the agency was seeking to procure a tactical air navigation system which would need to pass a flight check and meet certain readiness levels.  Selex — a prospective offeror — filed a protest raising concerns about when the flight check and readiness level requirements would need to be satisfied. 

GAO found that the solicitation was ambiguous as to this issue and therefore should be amended.  Some terms in the solicitation suggested the flight check and readiness level requirements needed to be met at the time of the proposal submission, while other terms suggested they could be met sometime after award.  GAO explained that, given the conflicting language, “it is impossible for offerors . . . to know whether the . . . requirements are due at [the] time of proposal submission or after award.” 

GAO further found that, because the agency “was required to provide offerors with sufficient detail in the solicitation to enable them to compete intelligently and on a relatively equal basis[,]” Selex was prejudiced by “the solicitation’s failure to clearly state when the agency required the  . . . terms to be completed.”

While Selex had argued that the solicitation’s terms were “unduly restrictive of competition because” they could “be read as requiring offerors to submit successful flight check and . . . readiness level attestations at the time of proposal submission,” GAO declined to pass upon that allegation “until the solicitation is amended to unambiguously reflect when the requirements at issue are due[.]”

The Selex decision is a good reminder that pre-award protests can be a useful tool when a solicitation is confusing, unfair, or unduly burdensome.  

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Kayleigh Scalzo Kayleigh Scalzo

Ranked by Chambers USA among government contracts practitioners, Kayleigh Scalzo represents government contractors in bid protests and other high-stakes litigation matters with the government and other private parties. She has litigated bid protests in a wide variety of forums, including the Government Accountability…

Ranked by Chambers USA among government contracts practitioners, Kayleigh Scalzo represents government contractors in bid protests and other high-stakes litigation matters with the government and other private parties. She has litigated bid protests in a wide variety of forums, including the Government Accountability Office, U.S. Court of Federal Claims, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, FAA Office of Dispute Resolution for Acquisition, federal and state agencies, and state courts.

Kayleigh a co-chair of the American Bar Association Public Contract Law Section’s Bid Protest Committee. She is also a frequent speaker on bid protest issues.

Kayleigh maintains an active pro bono practice focused on immigration issues and gender rights.

Photo of Andrew Guy Andrew Guy

Andrew Guy advises clients across a broad range of government contracting issues — including regularly representing contractors in bid protests before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”).

Andrew also has extensive investigations and False Claims Act…

Andrew Guy advises clients across a broad range of government contracting issues — including regularly representing contractors in bid protests before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”).

Andrew also has extensive investigations and False Claims Act experience. He routinely assists clients in responding to Civil Investigative Demands and other government inquiries.

Before joining the firm, Andrew clerked for the Honorable Kenneth F. Ripple of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.