[Protest of Army Solicitation for Security Guard Services]

B-240402.5: Jan 4, 1991

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested an Army solicitation for security guard services, contending that the: (1) payment bond requirement was excessive and unduly restrictive of competition; and (2) specified evaluation criteria were inappropriate. GAO held that the: (1) Army reasonably based its determination that performance and payment bonds were necessary on previous contractor performance; and (2) protester untimely filed after bid opening its protest regarding solicitation improprieties. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.

Nov 25, 2020

Nov 24, 2020

Nov 20, 2020

Nov 19, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here