[Protest of Navy IFB Cancellation]

A firm protested the Navy's cancellation of a solicitation, contending that the decision was arbitrary and capricious since the needed changes were already provided for as contingencies in the solicitation. The protester also claimed reimbursement for legal fees in connection with its protest and bid preparation costs. In reviewing the solicitation specifications, the Navy determined that its needs had changed and decided to cancel the solicitation. GAO held that: (1) contracting officers have the discretion to determine an agency's minimum needs and the best method of accommodating those needs; (2) the protester bears the burden of showing that a cancellation is unreasonable; and (3) authorization to determine entitlement to protest costs was not in effect when the protest was filed. Accordingly, the protest and the claims were denied.