This is the accessible text file for GAO special report number GAO-15-
256SP entitled 'GAO Bid Protest Annual Report to Congress for Fiscal 
Year 2014' which was released on November 18, 2014. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

GAO-15-256SP: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO:
441 G St. N.W. 
Washington, DC 20548: 

B-158766: 

November 18, 2014: 

Re: GAO Bid Protest Annual Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 2014: 

Congressional Committees: 

This letter responds to the requirements of the Competition in 
Contracting Act of 1984, 31 U.S.C. § 3554(e)(2) (CICA), that the 
Comptroller General report to Congress each instance in which a 
federal agency did not fully implement a recommendation made by our 
Office in connection with a bid protest decided the prior fiscal year, 
and to describe each instance in which a final decision of a protest 
was not issued within 100 days of when the protest was filed with our 
Office. We also provide data concerning our overall protest filings 
for the fiscal year. Finally, this letter addresses the requirement 
that our report "include a summary of the most prevalent grounds for 
sustaining protests" during the preceding year. Id. 

Agency Failure to Fully Implement Recommendations: 

For fiscal year 2014, one federal agency declined to implement the 
recommendations made by our Office in connection with a bid protest. 
By letter dated December 18, 2013, we reported an occurrence involving 
the Department of the Air Force: Asiel Enterprises, Inc., B-408315.2, 
Sept. 5, 2013, 2013 CPD ¶ 205. As explained in our December 18, 2013, 
letter, we sustained the protest regarding the Air Force's efforts to 
implement its Food Transformation Initiative without following 
applicable competitive procurement procedures. Under this initiative, 
the Air Force transferred mission essential feeding functions, an 
appropriated fund activity, at two of its installations to a non-
appropriated fund instrumentality using a memorandum of agreement 
(MOA). In this regard, the protester argued that the head of the 
agency, citing the public interest exception to competition, 10 U.S.C. 
§ 2304(c)(7) (2012), unreasonably justified use of the MOA to 
implement the Food Transformation Initiative. 

In sustaining the protest, our Office found that the Air Force's use 
of the public interest exception under 10 U.S.C. § 2304(c)(7) was 
improper for two reasons. First, the Air Force improperly relied on 10 
U.S.C. § 2492 as its authority for entering into the MOA. Section 2492 
provides authority for agencies and instrumentalities that support the 
operation of the morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) system to enter 
into contracts or other agreements to provide or obtain goods and 
services beneficial to the efficient management and operation of that 
MWR system. We concluded that the agreement is not for the benefit of 
the MWR system, as the statute contemplates. Instead, the MOA provides 
for transferring appropriated funds to the Air Force Mission Essential 
Feeding Fund to implement the Air Force's mission essential feeding 
requirement, a non-MWR activity. Second, we concluded that the 
Secretary of the Air Force's determination and finding supporting the 
use of the public interest exception under 10 U.S.C. § 2304(c)(7) to 
avoid the applicable competitive procurement procedures was improper 
because the public interest exception to competition can only be used 
to justify procurement actions, and the MOA is not a procurement. 

Effect of Government Shutdown: 

For 16 days in October 2013, GAO, like most of the rest of the United 
States Government, ceased operations and shut down as the result of a 
delay in the enactment of appropriations to fund operations for fiscal 
year 2014. When the government shut down, we posted on our website, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov], an explanation of how the shutdown 
would affect bid protest activities and how we would proceed when the 
government resumed operations. We explained that we would extend the 
bid protest deadlines one day for each day that GAO was shut down. 
When the federal government shut down on October 1, there were 280 
active bid protest cases in progress. Because the government shutdown 
lasted for 16 days, the bid protest deadlines were extended for a 
maximum of 16 days. 

Despite this extension, we endeavored to decide all of the 280 cases 
within 100 calendar days from when they were filed, and we were able 
to resolve all but 39 cases within that time frame. In only 5 of the 
39 cases (12.82 percent) were we actually compelled to extend 
resolution of the protests for the maximum 16 calendar days. As a 
result, GAO decided all protests within 100 calendar days for the 
period that the government was funded. Enclosed for your information 
is a chart detailing each of the 39 cases (Enclosure I). 

Summary of Overall Protest Filings: 

During the 2014 fiscal year, we received 2,561 cases: 2,445 protests, 
50 cost claims, and 66 requests for reconsideration. We closed 2,458 
cases during the fiscal year: 2,351 protests, 49 cost claims, and 58 
requests for reconsideration. Of the 2,458 cases closed, 292 were 
attributable to GAO's bid protest jurisdiction over task orders. 
Enclosed for your information is a chart comparing bid protest 
activity for fiscal years 2010-2014 (Enclosure II). 

Most Prevalent Grounds for Sustaining Protests: 

In fiscal year 2013, Congress added a new requirement for our Annual 
Report on Bid Protests. This provision requires that the report 
"include a summary of the most prevalent grounds for sustaining 
protests" during the preceding year. 31 U.S.C. § 3554(e)(2). 

Of the decisions resolved on the merits during fiscal year 2014, our 
Office sustained 13 percent. Our review shows that the most prevalent 
reasons for sustaining the protests during the 2014 fiscal year were: 
(1) failure to follow the evaluation criteria;[Footnote 1] (2) flawed 
selection decision;[Footnote 2] (3) unreasonable technical evaluation; 
[Footnote 3] and (4) unequal treatment.[Footnote 4] It is important to 
note that a significant number of protests filed with our Office do 
not reach a decision on the merits because agencies voluntarily take 
corrective action in response to the protest rather than defend the 
protest on the merits. Agencies need not, and do not, report any of 
the myriad reasons they decide to take voluntary corrective action. 

Signed by: 

Susan A. Poling: 
General Counsel: 

Enclosures: 

The Honorable Barbara A. Mikulski: 
Chairwoman: 
The Honorable Richard C. Shelby: 
Vice Chairman: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Carl Levin: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable James Inhofe: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Armed Services: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Tom Coburn: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell: 
Chairwoman: 
The Honorable James E. Risch: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Harold Rogers: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Nita M. Lowey: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Howard P. "Buck" McKeon: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Adam Smith: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Armed Services: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Darrell E. Issa: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Sam Graves: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Nydia M. Velázquez: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Small Business: 
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Enclosure I: 

Impact of Government Shutdown[Footnote 5]: 

B-Number: B-408516; 
Protester: Dyncorp International, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/15; 
Date Closed: 10/29; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 14. 

B-Number: B-408519; 
Protester: Deval, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/15; 
Date Closed: 10/25; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 10. 

B-Number: B-408521; 
Protester: M Squared Design; 
Disposition: Dismissed; 
Original Due Date: 10/16; 
Date Closed: 10/30; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 14. 

B-Number: B-408534; 
Protester: Choctaw Contracting Services; 
Disposition: Dismissed; 
Original Due Date: 10/21; 
Date Closed: 10/31; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 10. 

B-Number: B-408535; 
Protester: Star Food Service, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/21; 
Date Closed: 11/1; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 11. 

B-Number: B-408541; 
Protester: Reyna-Capital Joint Venture; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/21; 
Date Closed: 11/1; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 11. 

B-Number: B-408543; 
Protester: Logistics 2020, Inc.; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 10/21; 
Date Closed: 11/6; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 16. 

B-Number: B-407797.3; 
Protester: Serco, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/23; 
Date Closed: 11/8; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 16. 

B-Number: B-408548; 
Protester: Worldwide Information Network Systems, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/23; 
Date Closed: 11/1; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 9. 

B-Number: B-408546.2; 
Protester: Harris IT Services Corp.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/23; 
Date Closed: 10/31; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 8. 

B-Number: B-408552; 
Protester: CACI Technologies, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/24; 
Date Closed: 11/1; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 8. 

B-Number: B-408558; 
Protester: CMI Management, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/24; 
Date Closed: 11/8; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 15. 

B-Number: B-408080.2; 
Protester: L&G Technology Services, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/25; 
Date Closed: 11/6; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 12. 

B-Number: B-408565; 
Protester: BAE Systems Information and Electronic Systems Integration, 
Inc.; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 10/28; 
Date Closed: 11/13; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 16. 

B-Number: B-408575; 
Protester: AXIS Management Group, LLC; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 10/28; 
Date Closed: 11/13; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 16. 

B-Number: B-408584; 
Protester: Streit USA Armoring, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/30; 
Date Closed: 11/5; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 6. 

B-Number: B-408585; 
Protester: IMR Development Corp.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 10/30; 
Date Closed: 11/13; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 14. 

B-Number: B-408624; 
Protester: SRA International, Inc.; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 11/8; 
Date Closed: 11/25; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 16. 

B-Number: B-405417.2; 
Protester: Mark Dunning Industries, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 11/14; 
Date Closed: 11/19; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 5. 

B-Number: B-408682; 
Protester: Emergency Vehicle Installations Corp.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 11/18; 
Date Closed: 11/27; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 9. 

B-Number: B-408683; B-408683.2; 
Protester: Government Logistics Support Services, LLC; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 11/18; 11/21; 
Date Closed: 12/3; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 15; 12. 

B-Number: B-408708; 
Protester: AMEC Programs, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 11/21; 
Date Closed: 12/4; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 13. 

B-Number: B-408124.4; 
Protester: 6K Systems, Inc.; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 11/27; 
Date Closed: 12/9; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 12. 

B-Number: B-408708.2; 
Protester: Bechtel National, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 11/27; 
Date Closed: 12/4; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 7. 

B-Number: B-408269.2; 
Protester: TeleCommunication Systems, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/4; 
Date Closed: 12/13; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 9. 

B-Number: B-408810; 
Protester: PTZ Insurance Agency, LTD; 
Disposition: Dismissed; 
Original Due Date: 12/9; 
Date Closed: 12/11; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 2. 

B-Number: B-407273.17; 
Protester: ICF Incorporated, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/12; 
Date Closed: 12/19; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 7. 

B-Number: B-408814; 
Protester: Carson Industries, Inc.; 
Disposition: Dismissed; 
Original Due Date: 12/12; 
Date Closed: 12/13; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 1. 

B-Number: B-408112.2; 
Protester: Wyle Laboratories, Inc.; 
Disposition: Sustained; 
Original Due Date: 12/12; 
Date Closed: 12/27; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 15. 

B-Number: B-407975.2; B-407975.4; 
Protester: Navistar Defense, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/12; 12/18; 
Date Closed: 12/19; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 7; 1. 

B-Number: B-408825; 
Protester: HP Enterprise Services, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/12; 
Date Closed: 12/23; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 11. 

B-Number: B-407975.3; 
Protester: AM General, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/12; 
Date Closed: 12/19; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 7. 

B-Number: B-408862; 
Protester: Planning Systems, Inc.; 
Disposition: Dismissed; 
Original Due Date: 12/18; 
Date Closed: 12/20; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 2. 

B-Number: B-408877; 
Protester: XYZ Corporation; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/18; 
Date Closed: 1/2; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 15. 

B-Number: B-408919; 
Protester: HRCI-MPSC PASS, LLC; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/27; 
Date Closed: 1/8; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 12. 

B-Number: B-408925; 
Protester: Professional Performance Development Group, Inc.; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 12/30; 
Date Closed: 12/31; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 1. 

B-Number: B-409004; 
Protester: DM Petroleum Operations Company; 
Disposition: Denied; 
Original Due Date: 1/8; 
Date Closed: 1/15; 
Number of Days Extended by Shutdown: 7. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Enclosure II: 

Bid Protest Statistics for Fiscal Years 2010-2014: 

Cases Filed[A]: 
FY 2014: 2,561[B] (up 5%); 
FY 2013: 2,429 (down 2%); 
FY 2012: 2,475 (up 5%); 
FY 2011: 2,353 (up 2%); 
FY 2010: 2,299 (up 16%). 

Cases Closed: 
FY 2014: 2,458[B]; 
FY 2013: 2,538; 
FY 2012: 2,495; 
FY 2011: 2,292; 
FY 2010: 2,226. 

Merit (Sustain + Deny) Decisions: 
FY 2014: 556; 
FY 2013: 509; 
FY 2012: 570; 
FY 2011: 417; 
FY 2010: 441. 

Number of Sustains: 
FY 2014: 72; 
FY 2013: 87; 
FY 2012: 106; 
FY 2011: 67; 
FY 2010: 82. 

Sustain Rate: 
FY 2014: 13%; 
FY 2013: 17%; 
FY 2012: 18.6%; 
FY 2011: 16%; 
FY 2010: 19%. 

Effectiveness Rate[D]: 
FY 2014: 43%; 
FY 2013: 43%; 
FY 2012: 42%; 
FY 2011: 42%; 
FY 2010: 42%. 

ADR[E] (cases used): 
FY 2014: 96; 
FY 2013: 145; 
FY 2012: 106; 
FY 2011: 140; 
FY 2010: 159. 

ADR Success Rate[F]: 
FY 2014: 83%; 
FY 2013: 86%; 
FY 2012: 80%; 
FY 2011: 82%; 
FY 2010: 80%. 

Hearings[G]: 
FY 2014: 4.70% (42 cases); 
FY 2013: 3.36% (31 cases); 
FY 2012: 6.17% (56 cases); 
FY 2011: 8% (46 cases); 
FY 2010: 10% (61 cases). 

Notes: 

[A] All entries in this chart are counted in terms of the docket 
numbers (“B” numbers) assigned by our Office, not the number of 
procurements challenged. Where a protester files a supplemental 
protest or multiple parties protest the same procurement action, 
multiple iterations of the same “B” number are assigned (i.e., .2, 
.3). Each of these numbers is deemed a separate case for purposes of 
this chart. Cases include protests, cost claims, and requests for 
reconsideration. 

[B] From the prior fiscal year. 

[C] Of the 2,458 cases closed in fiscal year 2014, 292 are 
attributable to GAO’s bid protest jurisdiction over task or delivery 
orders placed under indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts. 

[D] Based on a protester obtaining some form of relief from the 
agency, as reported to GAO, either as a result of voluntary agency 
corrective action or our Office sustaining the protest. This figure is 
a percentage of all protests closed this fiscal year. 

[E] Alternative Dispute Resolution. 

[F] Percentage of cases resolved without a formal GAO decision after 
ADR. 

[G] Percentage of fully-developed cases in which GAO conducted a 
hearing; not all fully-developed cases result in a merit decision. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] E.g., Logistics 2020, Inc., B-408543, B-408543.3, Nov. 6, 2013, 
2013 CPD ¶ 258 (finding that the agency's evaluation of offerors' 
proposed personnel failed to include a qualitative assessment as 
required by the solicitation). 

[2] E.g., IBM U.S. Federal, a division of IBM Corp.; Presidio 
Networked Solutions, Inc., B-409806 et al., Aug. 15, 2014, 2014 CPD ¶ 
241 (finding that source selection authority improperly considered 
information contained in pages that exceeded established page 
limitation). 

[3] E.g., Native Resource Dev. Co., B-409617.3, July 21, 2014, 2014 
CPD ¶ 217 (finding that agency mechanically applied internal staffing 
estimates when evaluating proposals). 

[4] E.g., Alutiiq Pacific, LLC, B-409584, B-409584.2, June 18, 2014, 
2014 CPD ¶ 196 (finding that agency disparately assigned strengths to 
awardee's and protester's proposal for offering essentially the same 
feature). 

[5] The government shutdown in October 2013 resulted in GAO extending 
bid protest deadlines up to 16 days (the period of the shutdown) for 
cases in progress at the time the government shut down. GAO decided 
all protests within 100 calendar days for the period the government 
was funded. 

[End of document]