Request for Reconsideration

A company requested reconsideration of a decision which denied its protest of alleged improprieties in a request for proposals (RFP) issued by the Department of the Army. The company also protested the Army's determination to exclude it from competition for its failure to successfully complete one of the benchmark tests. In its request for reconsideration, the company alleged that the Army's basis for its resource utilization estimate was unreasonable and that its plan to revise the RFP to reflect the revised estimate was improper. Since the company did not show any error of fact or law in the prior decision, that decision was affirmed. Concerning its protest of the benchmark testing, the company alleged that: (1) the Army's advice to the company's representatives did not explain what was to be measured in the test; (2) the benchmark structure itself was defective; and (3) the Army's actions were unreasonable in requiring the company to rerun portions of the test, in requiring it to make a format change prior to rerunning a portion of the test, and in not providing it a third opportunity to successfully complete the test. As to the first allegation, GAO determined that the Army's oral advice to the company's representatives prior to the benchmark constituted adequate notice of what the Army's requirements were. The allegation concerning defects in the benchmark structure was untimely since the company learned of the basis for protest at the first benchmark test but did not file its protest within the required timeframe. In view of the express requirements of the RFP, the time and expense of the tests, and the lack of a showing of any significant equipment failure, the Army's actions in conducting the benchmark were held to be reasonable and proper. Accordingly, the protest was denied.