[Protest of Elimination From Competitive Range]

A firm protested its elimination from the competitive range under a request for proposals (RFP) issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to acquire computers and software. The RFP reserved the right to request an operational capability demonstration on an installed system similar to the one being procured. The offerers were provided instructions, programs, and data approximately 8 weeks prior to the test. After the protester's demonstration, IRS concluded that the protester's offer did not meet the mandatory requirements of the solicitation. The protester disagreed with this assessment, but it refused the IRS offer of the opportunity to repeat its demonstration, and IRS eliminated the protester from the competition. The protester contended that its elimination from the competitive range was improper. The determination of whether a proposal is within the competitive range is primarily a matter of administrative discretion which GAO will not disturb absent a clear indication that the determination lacks a reasonable basis. GAO found that the protester focused its protest on RFP requirements and ignored the refinements reflected in the test instructions. Therefore, GAO found that IRS was reasonable in considering the protester's demonstration to be deficient in a particular area. GAO would not consider the protester's assertion that the programs in its deficient proposal were not compatible with a Federal information processing standard, since the protester failed to raise the question prior to the test date. GAO agreed with the protester that the RFP could have been clearer in stating one requirement. However, GAO found that IRS had a reasonable basis for its assessment that the protester's offer failed to meet this requirement. GAO has previously held that an offerer's failure to demonstrate the ability to satisfy mandatory minimum requirements of a solicitation is a sufficient basis to exclude that offerer from competition. Since the protester refused the IRS offer allowing it to repeat its demonstration, GAO found that the protester was reasonably excluded from the competitive range. Accordingly, the protest was denied.