[Protest of Army Procurement of Magnesium Batteries]

A firm protested an Army solicitation for magnesium batteries, contending that: (1) the telegram it sent was a timely protest since the Army received the telegram prior to bid opening; and (2) the Army should have procured lithium rather than magnesium batteries because of the overall advantages of lithium batteries. GAO held that: (1) since the telegram protesting the procurement stated that details would follow in another letter, it was not sufficient to constitute a timely protest; and (2) the portion of the protest alleging a solicitation impropriety was untimely filed since the protester filed it after bid opening. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.