GAO Dismisses Perimeter Solutions’ Protest Over Sole-Source Award for Wildfire Retardant Testing

In Perimeter Solutions LP, B-423321; B-423321.2 (May 6, 2025), the Government Accountability Office (GAO) dismissed a protest filed by Perimeter Solutions LP against the U.S. Forest Service’s decision to award a sole-source contract to Fortress North America, LLC, for testing and supplying an aerial long-term fire retardant (LTFR) product known as Qela. The protest centered on the agency’s justification for bypassing competitive procedures and Perimeter’s contention that it had a competing product eligible for similar testing.

Perimeter, the incumbent provider of LTFR products, claimed that the agency’s justification for the sole-source award was flawed and that it should have had an opportunity to compete, particularly since it also possessed a “conditionally qualified” product. The Forest Service had concluded that Qela was conditionally qualified in December 2024 and required additional operational field evaluation (OFE), including up to 900,000 gallons of the product. The agency cited public safety and the unique status of Qela as the only product ready for immediate OFE as grounds for the sole-source award under FAR 6.302-1.

GAO dismissed the protest on the grounds that Perimeter was not an “interested party” under the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) and GAO’s Bid Protest Regulations. Although Perimeter argued that it too had a conditionally qualified product, the Forest Service had introduced a new testing requirement—galvanic corrosion testing—after identifying aircraft corrosion problems in prior LTFR products. Fortress’s Qela had already passed this new test, while Perimeter’s products had not. GAO determined that readiness for field testing is a discretionary agency decision and that Perimeter’s failure to complete the revised qualification protocol rendered it ineligible to compete at the time of the procurement.

GAO also found no merit in Perimeter’s claim that the testing requirement was fabricated to exclude competition. The record demonstrated that revisions to the LTFR specification were in development since November 2024, well before the protest, and included legitimate concerns related to aviation safety. Moreover, the Forest Service clarified that testing Qela was necessary to determine its viability and that Perimeter’s product, once qualified, could similarly be procured through a sole-source mechanism if appropriate.

The decision underscores the broad discretion agencies have in defining procurement needs, especially when public safety is implicated. It also reinforces the importance of timing and procedural readiness in establishing protest standing. For government contractors, this case is a cautionary reminder that having a potentially eligible product is insufficient if it has not cleared agency-defined qualification thresholds at the time of the procurement decision.

This summary is based on the May 6, 2025, decision authored by Edda Emmanuelli Perez, General Counsel of the U.S. Government Accountability Office. You can read the full decision here: GAO B-423321 Decision.

Disclaimer: This blog post is a general summary and is not guaranteed to be accurate or up to date. It does not constitute legal advice.