[Claim for Proposal Preparation Costs]

A firm claimed reimbursement for expenses incurred in preparing proposals and pursuing protests in connection with two requests for proposals (RFP) issued by the Army Missile Command for pulse forming networks. The claimant alleged that the Army forced it to participate in the procurements by issuing the RFP's under applicable legislation and then conducted the procurements in bad faith. The Army canceled the first RFP, because the claimant as the only bidder refused to provide the required cost or pricing data. The claimant protested the cancellation to GAO. When the Army resolicited the same requirement, the claimant filed a second protest, alleging that the new RFP contained a number of improprieties. Before a decision was reached on either protest, the Army determined that it no longer required the items and canceled the resolicitation. The claimant did not protest the cancellation of the second RFP, and both protests were dismissed. Nearly 2 months after the second cancellation, the firm filed a claim for proposal preparation costs. To recover these costs, an offeror must be able to show that, if the agency had acted properly, it had a substantial chance of receiving the award. Since the claimant did not protest the second cancellation within 10 working days after learning of it, GAO could not consider its claim. GAO has held that costs of pursuing a protest are not compensable. Accordingly, the claim for proposal preparation costs was dismissed and the claim for costs for pursuing the protests was denied.