A bid protest must allege a violation of a procurement statute or regulation. Although most protests challenge the award or proposed award of a contract, the GAO will also consider protests involving defective solicitations and other unreasonable agency actions like the cancellation of a solicitation. In certain cases, the GAO will consider protests involving the termination of a contract where the protest alleges that the government’s termination was based upon improprieties associated with the contract award (this is sometimes called a “reverse protest”). Additionally, the GAO will consider protests concerning (1) awards of subcontracts by or for a Federal agency, (2) sales by a Federal agency, or (3) procurement actions by government entities that do not fall within the strict definition of Federal agencies, if the agency or entity involved has agreed in writing to allow the GAO to decide the dispute.
In a recent decision, the GAO dismissed a bid protest filed by LS3 Inc. because the protester did not identify any statute or regulation that the agency violated. In that case, the protester alleged that the Department of Labor unreasonably delayed completing its corrective action in response to a previous protest filed by LS3 Inc. The protester argued that the agency’s corrective action was unreasonably delayed however, it did not identify any violation of a procurement law or regulation by the agency. The GAO dismissed the protest because the protester failed to allege any improper agency action and could point to no rule requiring an agency to complete corrective action by any set time. The case reaffirms long-standing GAO precedent that a protester must have a cognizable basis for its protest. LS3 Inc., B-415635.2, Nov. 2, 2018.
The entire GAO decision can be found here.