[Protest of Rejection of Low Bid Under Forest Service IFB]

A contractor protested the rejection of his low bid under an invitation for bids issued by the Forest Service for the construction of a trail in a national forest. The Forest Service contended that GAO lacked jurisdiction in the matter because the procurement was being funded entirely by a state and did not involve appropriated funds. GAO found that the funds for the procurement constituted appropriated funds due to the applicable grant agreement; therefore, GAO had the authority to consider the protest. The contracting officer found that the protester's bid was nonresponsible because one of his bid bonds was unacceptable, and the surety's affidavit contained deficiencies. The protester contended that the contracting officer's determination was arbitrary, capricious, contrary to regulations, and legally erroneous. Furthermore, the protester contended that the contracting officer should have required further certifications to cure the affidavit deficiencies. GAO will not object to a contracting officer's treatment of bonding obligations unless it appears to have been unreasonable. Since the Forest Service was not required to consider the surety bonds in any specific way in this procurement, GAO had no legal basis to object to the evaluation method used. In view of this finding, GAO had no need to address whether the agency erred in not seeking additional certifications from the surety. Accordingly, the protest was denied.