A firm protested any contract award issued under a Navy invitation for bids (IFB) for military housing maintenance, contending that: (1) the specifications were defective; and (2) the Navy should reimburse it for its protest costs. GAO noted that the Navy: (1) issued an amendment to include information that was missing from the IFB; (2) later cancelled the IFB because of the number and scope of revisions needed; and (3) decided to issue a new IFB. GAO held that: (1) the protest against the cancelled IFB was academic; and (2) the protester could not be reimbursed for its protest costs. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed and the claim was denied.
Skip to Highlights