[Protests of Army Contract Awards for Ski Equipment]

B-224022,B-224027,B-224027.2,B-224028,B-224582.2: Jan 5, 1987

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

Two firms protested Army contract awards for ski equipment, contending that: (1) the Army improperly rejected their proposals as technically unacceptable; (2) the specifications were defective; and (3) the Army did not use the same criteria to evaluate their bids as it did to evaluate the awardee's. The first protester also contended that the Army should have procured the skis under its mandatory Federal Supply Schedule contract. GAO held that: (1) the Army was not required to procure the skis under the schedule, since it found skis at lower prices; (2) the portion of the protest alleging unfair treatment and solicitation defects was untimely filed; (3) it would not review the evaluations, absent proof that the Army acted unreasonably or violated procurement statutes and regulations, since the protesters failed to comply with the solicitation requirements; (4) the Army unreasonably eliminated the protesters from the competitive range by not allowing them to provide samples; and (5) the Army unreasonably evaluated the protesters' technical proposals without explanation or discussions. Accordingly, the protests were sustained in part and denied in part.

Mar 19, 2018

  • Ampcus, Inc.
    We deny the protest.
  • AMAR Health IT, LLC
    We dismiss the protest because our Office does not have jurisdiction to entertain protests of task orders issued under civilian agency multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts that are valued at less than $10 million.
  • Centurum, Inc.--Costs
    We grant the request.

Mar 15, 2018

  • ORBIS Sibro, Inc.
    We sustain the protest in part and deny it in part.

Mar 14, 2018

Mar 13, 2018

Mar 12, 2018

Looking for more? Browse all our products here