[Protest Under Army Solicitation for Cartridge Case Conversion]

A firm protested the Army's failure to supply government-furnished equipment under a solicitation for cartridge case conversion, contending that: (1) a mobilization-base producer had a competitive advantage because only it had the required equipment; and (2) the Army improperly determined that it could not supply the equipment. GAO held that the Army: (1) did not create the protester's competitive disadvantage; and (2) reasonably determined that the other firm needed the required equipment to complete other mobilization-base work. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.