B-229917.8, Jun 22, 1988, 88-1 CPD 597

B-229917.8, Jun 22, 1988, 88-1 CPD 597

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Request for reconsideration is denied where protester fails to show any error of law or fact in prior decision holding that, where contracting agency properly decides to open negotiations and, if appropriate, terminate award improperly made on the basis of initial proposals, agency is not required to release to each offeror information regarding evaluation of initial proposals even though one offeror in fact received such information, since the information was released after initial award was made but before the decision to open negotiations, in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation and the Freedom of Information Act.

Federal Auction Service Corporation-- Request for Reconsideration:

Federal Auction Service Corporation requests reconsideration of our decision Federal Auction Service Corp., B-229917.4, et al., June lO, 1988, 88-2 CPD Para. ***, in part denying Federal's protest concerning the decision by the Veterans Administration (VA) to open negotiations under request for proposals (RFP) No. 26/101/2 for auctioneering services in connection with sales of single family properties owned by VA. We deny the request for reconsideration.

As explained in detail in our decision, VA originally made award under the RFP to Larry Latham Auctioneers, Inc. based on initial proposals. later determined that award on the basis of initial proposals was improper under the Competition in Contracting Act of 1884, 41 U.S.C. Sec. 253b(d)(1)(B) (Supp. III 1985) and decided to hold discussions and request best and final offers from all offerors in the competitive range. upheld VA's decision. See Kaufman Lasman Associates, Inc., et al., B-228917, et al., Feb. 26, 1988, 88-1 CPD Para. 202, aff'd on reconsideration, B-229917.3, Mar. 16, 1888, 88-1 CPD Para. 271.

After VA made the initial award to Latham but before it decided to open negotiations, VA held an oral debriefing for Kaufman Lasman Associates, Inc., an unsuccessful offeror under the RFp. VA also provided Kaufman with the evaluators' written comments on its proposal in response to a request filed by Kaufman under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). After VA decided to hold discussions under the RFP, Federal filed a protest contending that VA was required to conduct a debriefing for Federal and furnish it with written comments on its proposal equivalent to those provided to Kaufman. In our original decision on the protest, we found that VA was merely carrying out the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation Sec. 15.10O3 at the time it held the debriefing for Kaufman and complying with FOIA when it released the evaluators' written comments. The fact that the need subsequently arose to remedy the statutory violation involved in allowing the initial award to Latham to stand by reopening proceedings under the procurement did not mean that VA was required to compensate for any advantage Kaufman may have derived from the debriefing and disclosure of documents under FOIA, both of which were proper at the time VA provided them to Kaufman.

In its request for reconsideration, Federal contends that VA's actions toward Kaufman constituted preferential treatment or other unfair action and VA thus is required to equalize any competitive advantage accruing to Kaufman as a result. We addressed this issue in our original decision and Federal offers no support for its position that our decision is in error other than its general contention that VA's actions were improper. Since mere disagreement or reiteration of previously-rejected positions does not provide a basis for reconsideration, we see no basis to disturb our original decision. Durable, Inc.-Reconsideration, B-228911.2, Dec. 31, 1987, 88-1 CPD Para. 5.

The request for reconsideration is denied.