[Request for First Article Testing Requirement Waiver]

A firm protested the denial of its request that first article testing be waived under a solicitation issued by the Army for equipment. The protester had requested a waiver under a provision of the solicitation which allowed that the first article testing requirement might be waived when identical or similar equipment had previously been furnished by the bidder and accepted by the Government. In response to the Army's denial of its request for waiver of the requirement, the protester contended that: (1) no new operational requirements were included in a specification change cited by the Army; (2) there was no lengthy delay or interruption in its production of the equipment; (3) the Army's refusal to waive first article testing was arbitrary and capricious; and (4) the Government's reliance on the specification change as a basis to deny the waiver was inconsistent with inclusion of the waiver clause in the solicitation, since it appeared impossible for a current producer to be granted a waiver. GAO held that: (1) the protester never produced or tested the equipment using the new specification; (2) the protester's previous successful contracts for the equipment was not an adequate verification of its ability to produce the equipment in accordance with the new requirement; (3) the Army's denial of the waiver was consistent with its regulation regarding delays in production; (4) there was no showing that the Army's decision was arbitrary or capricious; and (5) the inclusion of the waiver clause in the solicitation did not confer an absolute right for bidders to have the waiver granted. Accordingly, the protest was denied.