B-211351.2, NOV 1, 1983

B-211351.2, NOV 1, 1983

DIGEST: PRIOR DECISION IS AFFIRMED UPON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WHERE PROTESTER MERELY RESTATES ALLEGATIONS WHICH WERE CONSIDERED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTEST.

COAST CANVAS PRODUCTS II CO., INC. - REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION:

COAST CANVAS PRODUCTS II CO., INC. (COAST), REQUESTS THAT WE RECONSIDER OUR DECISION IN COAST CANVAS PRODUCTS II CO., INC., B-211351, AUGUST 26, 1983, 83-2 CPD 258. IN THAT DECISION WE REFUSED TO CONSIDER WHETHER MODIFICATIONS IN THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE REPURCHASE OF A DEFAULTED CONTRACT RESULTED IN A NEW PROCUREMENT. WE ALSO HELD THAT DESPITE COAST'S LOW BID ON THE SOLICITATION, COAST, THE DEFAULTED CONTRACTOR, COULD NOT BE AWARDED THE REPURCHASE CONTRACT BECAUSE COAST'S BID PRICE WAS HIGHER THAN ITS ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE.

OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES REQUIRE THAT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION SPECIFY ANY ERROR OF LAW MADE OR INFORMATION NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTEST. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.9 (1983). COAST'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION REITERATES ITS BELIEF THAT THE SOLICITATION WAS A NEW PROCUREMENT AND THAT IT WAS JUSTIFIED IN BIDDING A HIGHER PRICE BECAUSE OF CHANGES IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. THESE CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED AND ANSWERED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTEST WHERE WE DECLINED TO CONSIDER THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS WAS A NEW PROCUREMENT SINCE THIS IS AN ISSUE WHICH IS FOR RESOLUTION BY THE ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS. SEE MARK A. CARROLL & SON, INC., B-198295, AUGUST 13, 1980, 80-2 CPD 114. WE THEREFORE CONCLUDED THAT THE GENERAL RULE GOVERNING REPROCUREMENT CONTRACTS APPLIED. THIS RULE PRECLUDES THE AWARD OF A REPURCHASE CONTRACT TO THE DEFAULTED CONTRACTOR AT A PRICE GREATER THAN THE TERMINATED CONTRACT PRICE. SEE AUTO-SKATE COMPANY, B-208643, SEPTEMBER 7, 1982, 82-2 CPD 203.

SINCE COAST HAS PRESENTED NO NEW INFORMATION, OR SPECIFIED ANY ERROR OF LAW MADE, THE PRIOR DECISION IS AFFIRMED.