- (1) This rule applies to protests filed under Section 63G-6a-1602.
(2) In accordance with the requirements in Section 63G-6a-1602, a person filing a protest must include a concise statement of the grounds upon which the protest is made.
(a) A concise statement of the grounds for a protest must include the relevant facts and evidence leading the protestor to contend that a grievance has occurred, including:
- (i) an alleged violation of Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code;
- (ii) an alleged violation of Title R33 or other applicable rule;
- (iii) a provision of the solicitation allegedly not being followed;
(iv) a provision of the solicitation alleged to be:
- (A) ambiguous;
- (B) confusing;
- (C) contradictory;
- (D) unduly restrictive;
- (E) erroneous;
- (F) anticompetitive; or
- (G) unlawful;
- (v) an alleged error made by the evaluation committee or procurement unit;
- (vi) an allegation of bias or discrimination by officials representing the procurement unit or the evaluation committee or an individual committee member; or
- (vii) a scoring criterion allegedly not being correctly applied or calculated.
- (b) "Relevant Facts and Evidence" as referred to in Section 63G-6a-1602, must be specific enough to enable the Protest Officer to determine, if such facts and evidence are proven to be true, whether a legitimate basis for the protest exists.
(c) None of the following qualify as a concise statement of the grounds for a protest:
- (i) claims made after the applicable deadlines set forth in law, rule, or the solicitation document, that the specifications, terms and conditions, or other elements of a solicitation are ambiguous, confusing, contradictory, unduly restrictive, erroneous, or anticompetitive;
(ii) vague or unsubstantiated claims or allegations that do not reference specific facts and evidence including vague or unsubstantiated claims or allegations such as:
- (A) the protestor should have received a higher score;
- (B) another vendor should have received a lower score;
- (C) a service or product provided by a protestor is better than another vendor's service or product;
- (D) another vendor cannot provide the procurement item for the price bid or perform the services described in the solicitation;
- (E) the procurement unit's eProcurement system or other electronic procurement system:
- (I) was slow, not operating properly, or was difficult to use or understand;
- (II) could not be accessed or did not allow documents to be downloaded; or
- (III) did not allow a response to be submitted after the deadline for receiving responses expired;
- (F) the protestor did not receive individual notice of a solicitation or was otherwise unaware of a solicitation when a procurement unit has complied with the public notice requirement in Section 63G-6a-112; or
- (G) officials representing the procurement unit or the evaluation committee or an individual committee member acted in a biased or discriminatory manner against the protestor;
(iii) filing a protest requesting:
- (A) a detailed explanation of the thinking and scoring of evaluation committee members, beyond the written statement described in Section 63G-6a-707;
- (B) protected information beyond what is provided under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code; or
- (C) other information, documents, or explanations reasonably considered not in compliance with the Utah Procurement Code or this rule by the Protest Officer.
- (3) In accordance with Section 63G-6a-1603, a Protest Officer may dismiss a protest if the concise statement of the grounds for filing a protest does not comply with Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Part 16, Protests, or this rule.
KEY: conduct, controversies, government purchasing, protests
Date of Last Change: October 22, 2024
Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 63G-6a-107.7(1); 63G-6a-16