Protest Concerning the Terms of Army Solicitation

The protester desired further clarification concerning a GAO decision. The protester asserted that an Army solicitation was unduly restrictive because only one firm manufactured the single integrated electronic system that was required. The protester, concluding from the Army's reply that a nonconforming proposal would be acceptable, did not file a protest in time. GAO saw no reason to invoke the significant issue exception because the exclusion of one or more offerers did not render a specification unduly restrictive if the specification represented legitimate needs of the government. The Army in a letter urged the protester to submit a revised proposal. Since the protester did not file a protest within the required 10 days after the Army's denial, the later filing was considered by GAO to be untimely. The protester requested a disclosure of the contract terms under the Freedom of Information Act. GAO, however, has no authority to determine what must be released by other agencies.