[Decision on Protester's Entitlement to Costs of Filing and Pursuing Protest Against Army Contract Award]

A firm requested recovery of the costs of filing and pursuing its protest against an Army contract award to another firm for a magnetic tape cartridge, contending that the Army: (1) failed to acknowledge and correct solicitation deficiencies promptly; and (2) wrongfully excluded it from competition. GAO noted that the Army decided to terminate the contract for convenience, revise the specifications, and resolicit. GAO held that the protester was not entitled to reimbursement for protest preparation costs, since it would be able to compete under the new solicitation. Accordingly, the claim was denied.