Request for Reconsideration

A firm requested reconsideration of a GAO decision which denied its protest against the allegedly inadequate, restrictive specifications in a request for proposals (RFP). The firm asserted that the restrictive specifications gave an unfair advantage to the incumbent contractor. The firm also contended that the specifications rendered inappropriate the fixed-price incentive contract which the agency proposed to award. GAO had noted that the RFP directed the offerors to base proposals on peakload estimates which appeared reasonably related to the work required under the contract and concluded that the protester had failed to show that the agency could reasonably provide more precise information. GAO also concluded that the specifications were not inadequate. The protester contended that GAO improperly placed the burden of proof on the protester to establish the allegedly restrictive nature of the solicitation. However, the protester presented no new factual grounds demonstrating that the earlier GAO decision was in error. The agency insisted that the specifications reflected the agency's minimum needs and considered the information given to bidders to have been sufficient. Because GAO could not question the agency's view that the specifications constituted an adequate basis for competition and because the agency made the requisite determination and findings for the type of contract it proposed to use, GAO had no basis for challenging the agency's decision to award a fixed-price incentive contract for these services. GAO found no evidence that the incumbent contractor enjoyed an unfair competitive advantage for the procurement. Accordingly, the prior GAO decision was affirmed.