[Protest of Army Contract Award for Drug Testing Services]

A firm protested an Army contract award for drug testing services, contending that the Army improperly allowed the awardee more time to complete certification testing, resulting in unequal competition. GAO held that the: (1) solicitation did not prohibit retesting; (2) additional testing opportunity did not benefit the awardee or prejudice the protester in the technical or cost evaluation; (3) Army reasonably relied on the certifying agency's statement, later discovered to be erroneous, that the awardee obtained certification before award; and (4) certifying agency had all the necessary data prior to award and certified the awardee. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.