[Request for Reconsideration of Two Decisions]
B-213046.6,B-215091.2: Sep 25, 1984
- Full Report:
A firm requested reconsideration of GAO decisions which dismissed one of its protests because it was determined not to be an interested party and another protest because the protester failed to show any error of law in the original decision. Although the protester contended that it was an interested party because the second low offerer was not technically acceptable, the agency indicated that the second low offerer was technically acceptable. Since the the protester failed to prove its allegation, it was not in line for award and the initial decision was affirmed. The other protest was denied because the protester failed to show any error of fact or law in an initial decision which denied its protest that it was prejudiced by the fact that the Army sent a request for proposals amendment to all firms originally solicited rather than to only the firms remaining in the competitive range. The record indicated that the Army only considered amended proposals submitted from those in the original competitive range. Since the protester failed to offer any evidence that would indicate that those outside the original competitive range were given consideration, this decision was also affirmed.