B-241510.2, May 21, 1991, 91-1 CPD 491
Highlights
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration is denied where protester merely repeats arguments it made previously. Which were previously considered by our Office. Contractor-operated facility will be more costly to the government when anticipated troop reductions occur than an award would have been to Printz on the basis of its proposed unit prices for laundry services at its contractor-owned. That this additional protest contention is based upon information which was previously available to the protester during its initial protest. The request for reconsideration is denied.
B-241510.2, May 21, 1991, 91-1 CPD 491
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration is denied where protester merely repeats arguments it made previously, expresses disagreement with our decision, and presents a new protest contention based upon information available during the course of the initial protest.
Attorneys
Printz Reinigung GmbH-- Reconsideration:
Printz Reinigung GmbH requests reconsideration of our decision in Printz Reinigung GmbH, B-241510, Feb. 8, 1991, 91-1 CPD Para. 143, in which we denied its protest against the cancellation of request for proposals (RFP) No. DAJA37-90-R-0099, issued by the Department of the Army for laundry and dry cleaning services, and challenging the interim contract awarded to PAE GmbH for these services.
Under our Bid Protest Regulations, to obtain reconsideration the requesting party must show that our prior decision may contain either errors of fact or law or present information not previously considered. C.F.R. Sec. 21.12(a) (1991). The repetition of arguments made during our consideration of the original protest and mere disagreement with our decision do not meet this standard. R.E. Scherrer, Inc.-- Recon., B-231101.3, Sept. 21, 1988, 88-2 CPD Para. 274.
In its request for reconsideration, Printz merely repeats arguments that it made during the course of its initial protest, which were previously considered by our Office, and expresses disagreement with our decision. Printz also raises a new protest contention in its reconsideration request, alleging that the award to PAE for laundry services at a government-owned, contractor-operated facility will be more costly to the government when anticipated troop reductions occur than an award would have been to Printz on the basis of its proposed unit prices for laundry services at its contractor-owned, contractor operated facility. The Army denies this allegation.
The record shows, and the protester does not suggest otherwise, that this additional protest contention is based upon information which was previously available to the protester during its initial protest. Failure to make all arguments or submit all information available during the course of the initial protest undermines the goals of our bid protest forum-- to produce fair and equitable decisions based on consideration of both parties' arguments on a fully developed record-- and cannot justify reconsideration of our prior decision. Department of the Army-- Recon., B-237742, June 11, 1990, 90-1 CPD Para. 546.
The request for reconsideration is denied.