B-242299.3, Jan 17, 1991, 90-2 CPD 55

B-242299.3, Jan 17, 1991, 90-2 CPD 55

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration of decision dismissing protest of award to firm that allegedly is not an authorized dealer of offered product is denied where only new information offered in request relates to awardee's status as a regular dealer under the Walsh-Healey Act, an issue which the General Accounting Office does not consider.

Attorneys

Southern CAD/CAM-- Reconsideration:

Southern CAD/CAM requests reconsideration of our December 11, 1990 decision, in which we dismissed its protest of the award of a contract to IBIS Corp. by the Department of Commerce under solicitation No. 53 EANE-0- 00057.

We deny the request for reconsideration because the request provides no basis for reconsidering our prior decision.

In its protest, Southern alleged that IBIS is not an authorized dealer of the software offered and thus will be unable to perform properly. dismissed the protest because our Office generally does not review a protester's challenge to an agency's affirmative determination of the awardee's ability to perform the contract. In its request for reconsideration, Southern offers additional support for its original allegations, and also asserts that IBIS is not in compliance with the requirements for certification as a regular dealer under the Walsh-Healey Act, 41 U.S.C. Sec. 35-45 (1988).

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 that warrants reversal or modification of our decision. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.12(a) (1990). 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.

The only new allegation Southern has offered here is that IBIS does not meet certain requirements for Walsh-Healey regular dealer certification. Under our Regulations, our Office does not consider the legal status of a firm as a regular dealer or manufacturer under the Walsh-Healey Act. C.F.R. Sec. 21.3(m)(9). By law, this matter is to be decided by the contracting agency, in the first instance, subject to review by the Small Business Administration, where a small business is involved, and the Secretary of Labor. The Pratt & Whitney Co., Inc.; Onsrud Mach. Corp., B-232190; B-232190.2, Dec. 13, 1988, 88-2 CPD Para. 588.

As Southern does not allege any error of fact or law, or present new information that would warrant reversal or modification of our decision, we have no basis upon which to reconsider it.