Request for Reconsideration

A firm requested reconsideration of its protest challenging the adequacy of discussions leading to the award of an Army contract to another firm for the decontamination and cleanup of Frankford Arsenal. The prior decision concluded that the discussions could have been more extensive in view of the fact that the protester's proposal was found to be so informationally inadequate that the contracting officer could not determine the extent of the protester's compliance with the solicitation's request for information. However, it was concluded that recompetition of the remaining work to be performed under the awarded contract was not feasible. This conclusion was based on the GAO determination that the discussions' shortcomings did not result from other than good faith and that performance under the contract had progressed to the point that substantial costs would be required for any partial termination of the contract. An audit, conducted at the time of the prior decision, revealed that Phase III of the contract was 40 percent complete. The protester questioned the $500,000 termination costs verified by the audit and relied upon in the prior decision. The audit showed that the monthly continuation costs were approximately $152,000. This was because in addition to the monthly costs for the arsenal caretaker contract, there were monthly costs for utilities, Government workforce salaries, and pro rated costs for overhead and repair. In view of this, GAO believed that there was economic support for its conclusion that recompetition was not feasible. Therefore, the prior decision was affirmed.