[Protest of GSA Exclusion of Bid From Competitive Range for Dormitory Furniture]

A firm protested the General Services Administration's (GSA) exclusion of its bid for dormitory furniture from the competitive range, contending that: (1) its bid sample product's deficiencies could easily be corrected during discussions; (2) its bid deficiencies were the result of ambiguous specifications; and (3) the prior contractor had an unfair competitive advantage, since it previously made the specified products. GAO held that: (1) GSA reasonably excluded the protester's bid from the competitive range, since the protester would have to revise its product substantially to make it technically acceptable; (2) GSA did not have to hold discussions with the protester, since it properly excluded its bid from the competitive range; (3) the protester's allegation that the solicitation specifications were ambiguous was without merit; and (4) the protester provided no evidence that the prior contractor's competitive advantage was due to preferential or unfair action by GSA. Accordingly, the protest was denied.