B-236061.3, Mar 22, 1990, 90-1 CPD 316
Highlights
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration of decision is denied where the protester essentially only restates its initial arguments and expresses disagreement with the decision. TC essentially repeats arguments that it made during its protest that its plan for performing the services is acceptable under the terms of the RFP and expresses disagreement with our decision. The fact that another RFP was worded more specifically. Is not relevant. indicated in our decision that even if we were to agree with TC that its interpretation of the solicitation was reasonable. It was clearly and repeatedly informed during discussions and at a site visit that its approach was not what the agency wanted.
B-236061.3, Mar 22, 1990, 90-1 CPD 316
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration of decision is denied where the protester essentially only restates its initial arguments and expresses disagreement with the decision.
Attorneys
Travel Centre-- Request for Reconsideration:
Travel Centre (TC) requests reconsideration of our decision Travel Centre, B-236061.2, Jan. 4, 1990, 90-1 CPD Para. 11, denying its protest of several awards under request for proposals No. AT/TC 20075 issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for the operation of commercial travel management centers for various geographic areas.
In our decision, we found that GSA had properly downgraded TC's proposal during evaluation for failing to provide for local offices offering full travel services as required by the RFP in designated areas. TC contended that its placement of a satellite ticket printer in the office of a subcontracted travel agent for the delivery of tickets while it performed the other travel services required by the RFP at its Wakefield, Massachusetts office complied with the terms of the RFP.
In its request for reconsideration, TC essentially repeats arguments that it made during its protest that its plan for performing the services is acceptable under the terms of the RFP and expresses disagreement with our decision. Under our Bid Protest Regulations, a party requesting reconsideration must show that our prior decision contained either errors of fact or law or that the protester has information not previously considered that warrants reversal or modification of our decision. C.F.R. Sec. 21.12(a) (1989). Repetition of arguments made during the original protest or mere disagreement with our decision does not meet this standard. Sletager, Inc.-- Request for Reconsideration, B-233350.2, Apr. 18, 1989, 89-1 CPD Para. 382.
TC also refers to another GSA solicitation that sets forth more explicitly than did the solicitation here GSA's specific requirements for a local full travel service office, and suggests that since the solicitation for this procurement did not contain such explicit requirements, TC could not be required to meet them. The fact that another RFP was worded more specifically, however, is not relevant. indicated in our decision that even if we were to agree with TC that its interpretation of the solicitation was reasonable, it was clearly and repeatedly informed during discussions and at a site visit that its approach was not what the agency wanted, and it was given the opportunity to modify its approach through the submission of a best and final offer. TC simply did not do so.
TC has provided no basis for us to reconsider our prior decision. Accordingly, the request for reconsideration is denied.