[Request for Reconsideration of Denial of Protest Against Army Contract Award]

A firm requested reconsideration of the dismissal of its protest of an Army contract award, contending that the dismissal: (1) was erroneous because GAO failed to find that the protester suffered prejudice due to alleged ambiguities in the solicitation; and (2) was unjust because GAO imposed too high a burden of proof for prejudice. GAO held that: (1) the protester's contention that it was prejudiced by its interpretation of the cost ceiling was without merit; (2) the protester failed to show that the Army unreasonably evaluated its bid; and (3) the protester failed to show any error of law or fact in the prior decision. Accordingly, the request for reconsideration was denied.