GAO Bid Protests
Here's a look at news stories involving federal bid protest decisions issued by the GAO General Counsel
Featured Stories
GAO Denies KriaaNet Protest Over Treasury Security Services Reaward to LBO Technology
By Marlyn T. Vitin
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by KriaaNet Inc., Leesburg, Virginia, challenging the U.S. Treasury Department's decision to award a security systems services task order to LBO Technology LLC, Leesburg, Virginia, after KriaaNet's earlier contract was terminated.
The dispute centered on operations and maintenance services for integrated security systems at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Treasury bureau responsible for producing U.S. currency and other secure documents.
Treasury initially awarded the work to KriaaNet in September 2025
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by KriaaNet Inc., Leesburg, Virginia, challenging the U.S. Treasury Department's decision to award a security systems services task order to LBO Technology LLC, Leesburg, Virginia, after KriaaNet's earlier contract was terminated.
The dispute centered on operations and maintenance services for integrated security systems at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Treasury bureau responsible for producing U.S. currency and other secure documents.
Treasury initially awarded the work to KriaaNet in September 2025after a competitive procurement set aside for eligible small businesses. But the agency later issued a cure notice, saying KriaaNet had failed to provide several proposed key personnel needed to begin performance. Treasury terminated the task order for default in December 2025.
The agency then turned to LBO Technology, the next-ranked competitor from the original competition, and issued an amended request for quotations before awarding the replacement task order in January 2026. The award was valued at $23.88 million.
KriaaNet argued that Treasury improperly changed the solicitation and effectively made a sole-source award to LBO rather than conducting a new competition. The company also claimed LBO could not be considered the next-in-line vendor because the revised solicitation differed from the original one.
GAO rejected those arguments, finding Treasury acted reasonably under federal rules governing reprocurements after a contractor default. The watchdog said agencies have broad discretion to obtain similar goods or services from another contractor when a prior awardee fails to perform.
According to the decision, Treasury's changes were limited. The agency removed one technical writer position, added one electronic security technician position, and dropped certain software license purchases because those licenses had already been obtained under KriaaNet's earlier contract. Other core requirements, including the performance work statement, labor categories, and places of performance, remained the same.
GAO concluded the revised requirement was still substantially similar to the original contract and that Treasury's actions were consistent with its obligation to seek competition to the maximum extent practicable.
The ruling leaves LBO Technology in place as the contractor for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing security systems support work.
* * # * *
Primary source of information - GAO: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422717.4%2Cb-422717.5
Publicly Released on: April 28, 2026 Published: April 23, 2026
Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Nathaniel J. Greeson, Esq., and Gabrielle A. Sprio, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester.
Daniel J. Strouse, Esq., and Samuel Van Kopp, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for LBO Technology, LLC, the intervenor.
Justin M. Wakefield, Esq., Nicholas A. Richardi, Esq., and Richard L. Hatfield, Esq., Department of the Treasury, for the agency.
Michelle Litteken, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
GAO Denies Bailey's Premier Services Protest Over Air Force Maintenance Contract Awards
By Marlyn T. Vitin
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by Bailey's Premier Services LLC, Fort Worth, Texas, after the company was not selected for a multiple-award U.S. Air Force contract for maintenance services.
The protest challenged the Department of the Air Force's evaluation of Bailey's proposal under a solicitation seeking contractors for the Contractor Field Team Labor Augmentation Support Requirements program. The contract vehicle was structured as a multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity arrangement with a five-year base ordering period
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by Bailey's Premier Services LLC, Fort Worth, Texas, after the company was not selected for a multiple-award U.S. Air Force contract for maintenance services.
The protest challenged the Department of the Air Force's evaluation of Bailey's proposal under a solicitation seeking contractors for the Contractor Field Team Labor Augmentation Support Requirements program. The contract vehicle was structured as a multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity arrangement with a five-year base ordering periodand a five-year option.
Amentum Services Inc. participated in the case as an intervenor, indicating it was among the awardees whose interests were affected by the protest.
The Air Force received 26 proposals by the January 2025 deadline. Under the solicitation, offerors were required to pass several screening factors, including submission of a completed Small Business Participation Commitment Document within the technical volume of their proposals.
The agency found Bailey's proposal unacceptable because the required document was not included in the technical volume. Instead, Bailey's placed it in a separate proposal volume designated for contract documentation.
Bailey's argued that the Air Force should have considered the proposal as a whole because the company had supplied the document elsewhere in its submission and had otherwise demonstrated its commitment to small business participation. The company contended that the omission was technical and should not have led to rejection.
GAO disagreed, finding that the Air Force followed the clear terms of the solicitation. The request for proposals expressly stated that the technical volume had to stand on its own and that evaluators would not cross-reference other proposal sections when conducting the technical review.
The watchdog also noted that the solicitation specifically warned offerors that failure to provide a complete Small Business Participation Commitment Document as required would result in a technically unacceptable rating.
Because Bailey's did not place the completed form in the required section, GAO concluded the company assumed the risk of an adverse evaluation.
The decision means the Air Force's awards under the maintenance services contract program remain intact, including awards to firms such as Amentum Services.
* * # * *
Primary source of information - GAO: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423066.3
Publicly Released on: April 29, 2026 Published: April 15, 2026
Jeremy S. Scholtes, Esq., Lauren S. Fleming, Esq., and Kathryn J. Carlson, Esq., Miles & Stockbridge P.C., for the protester.
Kevin P. Connelly, Esq., Kelly E. Buroker, Esq., Jeffrey M. Lowry, Esq., and Michael P. Ols, Esq., Vedder Price P.C., for Amentum Services, Inc., the intervenor.
Colonel Justin A. Silverman, Geoffrey R. Townsend, Esq., Major Princess Gaye, and Alexander S. Hall, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency.
Hannah G. Barnes, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
GAO Dismisses Threat Tec Protest Over Army Sole-Source Award to Chitra Productions
By Marlyn T. Vitin
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has dismissed a protest filed by Threat Tec LLC, Hampton, Virginia, challenging the U.S. Army's sole-source award contract to Chitra Productions LLC, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
The contract was issued by the U.S. Army Transformation and Training Command, known as T2COM, for services supporting the command's intelligence and operational environment mission.
Threat Tec argued that the Army improperly awarded the contract without competition and also alleged violations of the Procurement Integrity Act, claiming the agency failed to investigate
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has dismissed a protest filed by Threat Tec LLC, Hampton, Virginia, challenging the U.S. Army's sole-source award contract to Chitra Productions LLC, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
The contract was issued by the U.S. Army Transformation and Training Command, known as T2COM, for services supporting the command's intelligence and operational environment mission.
Threat Tec argued that the Army improperly awarded the contract without competition and also alleged violations of the Procurement Integrity Act, claiming the agency failed to investigateconcerns involving a former Threat Tec program manager who later joined Chitra.
GAO dismissed the challenge, finding the company's objections to the sole-source award were untimely and its Procurement Integrity Act allegations were premature.
According to the decision, the Army initially sought the services through a competitive procurement issued in January 2025. Threat Tec had previously performed the work through a joint venture with another company, but the joint venture partners split and submitted separate competing proposals through new entities.
While a separate protest over that competition was pending, the Army determined it needed interim support services. The agency then used the Small Business Innovation Research program to make a sole-source phase III award to Chitra in January 2026.
The Army concluded Chitra was eligible because it had acquired relevant technology and intellectual property connected to an earlier phase II research contract. That technology included tools used for rapid scenario development, training environments, and performance analytics.
Threat Tec later challenged whether Chitra qualified for the award, but GAO said those arguments were filed after the required deadline. The watchdog also said later supplemental claims based on the same issue were untimely.
On the Procurement Integrity Act allegations, GAO found Threat Tec filed its protest only one day after notifying the Army of its concerns, giving the agency insufficient time to complete a review. The Army stated that it had begun examining the matter.
GAO added that Threat Tec had not presented sufficient evidence of government misconduct to support a valid claim under the statute. The decision noted that concerns involving a former employee joining another private contractor, without evidence of improper government action, were largely private disputes rather than procurement violations.
The dismissal leaves Chitra Productions in place as the contractor for the temporary support work.
* * # * *
Primary source of information - GAO: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-424221
Publicly Released on: April 30, 2026 Published: April 23, 2026
Michael Gardner, Esq., Jordan N. Malone, Esq., Olivia Bellini, Esq., Shomari B. Wade, Esq., and Eleanor E. Ross, Esq., Greenberg Traurig, LLP, for the protester.
J. Bradley Reaves, Esq., Jacob D. Noe, Esq., Ken M. Hyde, Esq., and Tariq Abdel-Wakil, Esq., Reaves GovCon Group, for Chitra Productions, L.L.C., the intervenor.
Robert B. Neill, Esq., Lieutenant Colonel Anthony V. Lenze, Carter R. Cassidy, Esq., and Major Joseph A. Seaton, Jr., Department of the Army, for the agency.
Christine Martin, Esq., Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
GAO Denies KriaaNet Protest Over Treasury Security Services Reaward to LBO Technology
By Marlyn T. Vitin
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by KriaaNet Inc., Leesburg, Virginia, challenging the U.S. Treasury Department's decision to award a security systems services task order to LBO Technology LLC, Leesburg, Virginia, after KriaaNet's earlier contract was terminated.
The dispute centered on operations and maintenance services for integrated security systems at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Treasury bureau responsible for producing U.S. currency and other secure documents.
Treasury initially awarded the work to KriaaNet in September 2025
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by KriaaNet Inc., Leesburg, Virginia, challenging the U.S. Treasury Department's decision to award a security systems services task order to LBO Technology LLC, Leesburg, Virginia, after KriaaNet's earlier contract was terminated.
The dispute centered on operations and maintenance services for integrated security systems at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Treasury bureau responsible for producing U.S. currency and other secure documents.
Treasury initially awarded the work to KriaaNet in September 2025after a competitive procurement set aside for eligible small businesses. But the agency later issued a cure notice, saying KriaaNet had failed to provide several proposed key personnel needed to begin performance. Treasury terminated the task order for default in December 2025.
The agency then turned to LBO Technology, the next-ranked competitor from the original competition, and issued an amended request for quotations before awarding the replacement task order in January 2026. The award was valued at $23.88 million.
KriaaNet argued that Treasury improperly changed the solicitation and effectively made a sole-source award to LBO rather than conducting a new competition. The company also claimed LBO could not be considered the next-in-line vendor because the revised solicitation differed from the original one.
GAO rejected those arguments, finding Treasury acted reasonably under federal rules governing reprocurements after a contractor default. The watchdog said agencies have broad discretion to obtain similar goods or services from another contractor when a prior awardee fails to perform.
According to the decision, Treasury's changes were limited. The agency removed one technical writer position, added one electronic security technician position, and dropped certain software license purchases because those licenses had already been obtained under KriaaNet's earlier contract. Other core requirements, including the performance work statement, labor categories, and places of performance, remained the same.
GAO concluded the revised requirement was still substantially similar to the original contract and that Treasury's actions were consistent with its obligation to seek competition to the maximum extent practicable.
The ruling leaves LBO Technology in place as the contractor for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing security systems support work.
* * # * *
Primary source of information - GAO: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422717.4%2Cb-422717.5
Publicly Released on: April 28, 2026 Published: April 23, 2026
Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Nathaniel J. Greeson, Esq., and Gabrielle A. Sprio, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester.
Daniel J. Strouse, Esq., and Samuel Van Kopp, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for LBO Technology, LLC, the intervenor.
Justin M. Wakefield, Esq., Nicholas A. Richardi, Esq., and Richard L. Hatfield, Esq., Department of the Treasury, for the agency.
Michelle Litteken, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
GAO Denies Harper Construction Reconsideration Bid in Navy Housing Contract Dispute With Clark Construction
By Marlyn T. Vitin
WASHINGTON, April 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a request for reconsideration filed by Harper Construction Co. Inc., San Diego, California, reaffirming its earlier decision rejecting the firm's protest over a U.S. Navy construction contract awarded to Clark Construction Group-California LP, Irvine, California.
The dispute stems from a U.S. Navy procurement for repairs and upgrades to five bachelor enlisted quarters at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton in California. The solicitation, issued in July 2025, sought proposals under an existing pool of contractors and called for
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a request for reconsideration filed by Harper Construction Co. Inc., San Diego, California, reaffirming its earlier decision rejecting the firm's protest over a U.S. Navy construction contract awarded to Clark Construction Group-California LP, Irvine, California.
The dispute stems from a U.S. Navy procurement for repairs and upgrades to five bachelor enlisted quarters at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton in California. The solicitation, issued in July 2025, sought proposals under an existing pool of contractors and called foraward on a lowest-priced, technically acceptable basis.
In its original protest, Harper argued that the Navy improperly found its proposal technically unacceptable. Evaluators had concluded that one of Harper's proposed unit designs failed to meet minimum space requirements, particularly for required living areas such as kitchenettes. The Navy determined that the design could not realistically accommodate all required spaces within the prescribed square footage.
The GAO denied that protest in March 2026, finding the agency's evaluation reasonable and consistent with the solicitation. Harper then sought reconsideration, claiming the decision contained factual and legal errors, including misinterpretation of its position on space requirements and improper reliance on the Navy's explanations.
In its April 15, 2026 decision, the GAO rejected those arguments, concluding that Harper failed to meet the high bar required for reconsideration. Under GAO rules, a requester must show that a prior decision contained a clear error of fact or law, or present new information that would warrant changing the outcome.
The GAO found that Harper largely repeated arguments already raised and addressed in the initial protest. It also determined that the firm mischaracterized portions of the prior decision, including statements about whether its proposal met minimum net square footage requirements. According to the GAO, the earlier decision accurately reflected that Harper's design fell below certain thresholds, even as the firm disputed whether those thresholds applied.
The decision also dismissed Harper's contention that the Navy's explanations were inconsistent or improperly introduced after the protest. The GAO reiterated that it may consider post-protest explanations so long as they are credible and consistent with the record.
Finding no error in its earlier ruling, the GAO denied the reconsideration request, leaving the Navy's award to Clark Construction intact.
* * # * *
Primary source of information - GAO: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-419947.4
Publicly Released on: April 21, 2026 Published: Aprril 15, 2026
Dirk Haire, Esq., Jessica Haire, Esq., A. Michelle West, Esq., Michael J. Brewer, Esq., and Isabella S. Capanna, Esq., Burr & Forman LLP, for the requester.
Kristopher M. Cronin, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency.
Michelle Litteken, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
GAO Denies Logmet LLC Protest Over Air Force Maintenance Contract Evaluation
By Marlyn T. Vitin
WASHINGTON, April 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by LOGMET LLC of Round Rock, Texas, challenging its exclusion from a U.S. Air Force competition for maintenance services contracts.
The protest concerned LOGMET's non-selection for a multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract issued under a 2024 solicitation seeking contractor support for maintenance operations under the Air Force's Contractor Field Team program. The procurement anticipated multiple awards with a five-year base period and an additional five-year option.
LOGMET argued
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has denied a protest filed by LOGMET LLC of Round Rock, Texas, challenging its exclusion from a U.S. Air Force competition for maintenance services contracts.
The protest concerned LOGMET's non-selection for a multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract issued under a 2024 solicitation seeking contractor support for maintenance operations under the Air Force's Contractor Field Team program. The procurement anticipated multiple awards with a five-year base period and an additional five-year option.
LOGMET arguedthat the Air Force unreasonably evaluated its proposal, asserting that the agency should have used information in its submission--such as work samples and narratives--to assess its qualifications, even though a required self-scoring matrix was not included. The company also contended that the agency should have opened discussions to allow it to correct the omission.
The GAO rejected both arguments, finding that the Air Force acted reasonably and in accordance with the solicitation's terms. The decision emphasized that the solicitation explicitly required offerors to submit a self-scoring matrix as part of the technical evaluation process. This matrix was central to determining whether proposals met the minimum technical threshold score of 40,000 points required for further consideration.
Because LOGMET failed to include the matrix, the Air Force determined it could not validate a score and deemed the proposal technically unacceptable. The GAO agreed, noting that agencies are not obligated to infer or reconstruct required elements of a proposal from other materials. It reiterated that offerors bear the responsibility for submitting complete and adequately written proposals.
The GAO also found no fault in the Air Force's decision not to conduct discussions. The solicitation clearly stated the agency's intent to award contracts without discussions, and under such circumstances, agencies have broad discretion in deciding whether to engage offerors. Moreover, the GAO noted that even if discussions had been held, LOGMET's proposal would have remained ineligible because it failed to meet the minimum technical requirements.
The decision underscores the importance of strictly adhering to solicitation instructions, particularly in procurements using structured evaluation methods where missing required components can result in automatic disqualification.
The protest was denied on April 15, 2026.
* * # * *
Primary source of information - GAO: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423066.2
Publicly Released on: April 16, 2026 Published: April 15, 2026
Wayne Rankin for the protester.
Kevin P. Connelly, Esq., Kelly E. Buroker, Esq., Jeffrey M. Lowry, Esq., and Michael P. Ols, Esq., Vedder Price P.C., for Amentum Services, Inc., the intervenor.
Colonel Justin A. Silverman, Geoffrey R. Townsend, Esq., Major Princess Gaye, and Alexander S. Hall, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency.
Hannah G. Barnes, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
