GAO Takes Exception to Agency’s Rejection of Bid Under Buy American Act
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.13.18
In Addison Construction Company, GAO sustained a protest challenging the Department of Energy’s (DOE) rejection as nonresponsive of a bid that sought an exception to Buy American Act (the Act) requirements without providing certain information called for by FAR 52.225-9 and 52.225-10 (the clauses relevant to the exception request). While GAO acknowledged that the protester failed to provide certain required information, GAO nonetheless held that DOE could not simply reject the bid. Instead, because the protester provided sufficient information for DOE to understand the basis for the request, and because the omission of the information provided the protestor with no competitive advantage, GAO held that DOE was required to investigate whether an exception was appropriate. While the decision appears to flip the obligation that offerors submit well-written complete proposals, the decision is limited to the Act itself and the clauses at issue, which GAO held do not “require[] an agency to reject a bid as nonresponsive” in the face of missing information. As such, protestors should take heed that this case about exceptions to the rule represents the exception, not the rule.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
