_____________________________________________________
 
         MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED:  December 30, 1998
         _____________________________________________________
 
                            GSBCA 11988-P-R
 
                    IRVIN TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                        DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
 
                                           Respondent.
 
        Frank   Irvin,   II,   President   of   Irvin   Technologies
   Incorporated, appearing for Protester.
 
        COL Riggs  L. Wilks,  Jr., MAJ Charles  R. Marvin,  Jr., and
   CAPT  Sophia  Rafatjah,  Office  of  the  Chief  Trial  Attorney,
   Department of the Army, Arlington, VA, counsel for Respondent.
 
   Before Board  Judges LaBELLA,  Acting Chief  Judge, BORWICK,  and
   PARKER.
 
   BORWICK, Board Judge.
 
        Irvin Technologies Incorporated seeks reconsideration of our
   denial of its  protest filed against the Department  of the Army.
   Irvin Technologies Inc. v. Department of the Army, GSBCA 11988-P,
   (September 29,  1992).   Protester there  alleged that  award was
   improper because the awardee  failed to acknowledge with  its bid
   an  amendment   (adding  an  evaluation   preference  for   small
   businesses) to  the Invitation for  Bids.  We found  that awardee
   had submitted an  early bid, but  had acknowledged the  amendment
   prior to the date for receipt of proposals.  
 
        Protester now  says there  was an  irregularity because  the
   amendment is  dated with  an effective  date of June  9, but  the
   awardee's acknowledgment is  dated June 8.   Protester's argument
   is nothing  more than speculation.   There  is no proof  that the
   letter is false or that  awardee was unaware of the amendment  on
   June 8, before it sent the acknowledgement letter.  
 
        Protester's argument is a reinterpretation of  old evidence.
   We do not grant reconsideration on the basis of reinterpretations
   of old  evidence.   Irvin Technologies v.  Department of  the Air
   Force, et. al.,  GSBCA 11581-P-R, 1992 BPD    18, at 2  (Jan. 16,
   1992,;  Integrated Systems Group, Inc., GSBCA 10985-P-R, 91-2 BCA
     23,793,  1991  BPD   35,  at 3;  RMTC Systems,  GSBCA 11055-C-R
   (10251-P), 91-2 BCA   23,842, 1991 BPD   54.  
 
 
        Protester's motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
 
                                   ________________________________
                                   ANTHONY S. BORWICK
                                   Board Judge
 
 
   We concur:
   _________________________
   VINCENT A. LaBELLA
   Acting Chief Board Judge
   _________________________
   ROBERT W. PARKER
   Board Judge