[Protest of Army Contract Award for Collective Protection Equipment and Parts]

B-253921.4: Jul 10, 1995

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested an Army contract award for collective protection equipment and parts, contending that: (1) the Army did not follow competitive procurement procedures; (2) it was placed at a competitive disadvantage; and (3) the contract was awarded improperly. GAO held that the protester: (1) had prior notice that the Army had awarded a portion of the contract to the other firm; (2) untimely filed its protest more than 10 working days after it knew the basis of protest; and (3) was not an interested party to protest the contract award, since it did not qualify as an actual offeror under the solicitation. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.

Mar 20, 2018

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

  • Interoperability Clearinghouse
    We dismiss the protest because the protester, a not-for-profit entity, is not an interested party to challenge this sole-source award to an Alaska Native Corporation under the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 8(a) program.
  • Yang Enterprises, Inc.
    We dismiss the protest.

Looking for more? Browse all our products here