Skip to main content

B-224552, OCT 24, 1986

B-224552 Oct 24, 1986
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

PROCUREMENT - BID PROTEST - GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE PROCEDURES - AGENCY NOTIFICATION PROTEST IS DISMISSED WHERE PROTESTER FAILED TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENT THAT CONTRACTING AGENCY RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PROTEST WITHIN 1 WORKING DAY AFTER THE PROTEST IS FILED. WE DISMISS THE PROTEST BECAUSE SCT FAILED TO FURNISH A COPY OF THE PROTEST TO THE CONTRACTING AGENCY WITHIN 1 DAY AFTER THE PROTEST WAS FILED WITH OUR OFFICE. STATES THAT "THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MUST RECEIVE A COPY OF THE PROTEST NO LATER THAN 1 WORKING DAY AFTER THE PROTEST IS FILED" WITH OUR OFFICE. THE BASIS FOR THE 1-DAY NOTICE REQUIREMENT IS FOUND IN THE COMPETITION IN CONTRACTING ACT OF 1984. SCT'S PROTEST LETTER WAS DATED OCTOBER 9.

View Decision

B-224552, OCT 24, 1986

PROCUREMENT - BID PROTEST - GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE PROCEDURES - AGENCY NOTIFICATION PROTEST IS DISMISSED WHERE PROTESTER FAILED TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENT THAT CONTRACTING AGENCY RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PROTEST WITHIN 1 WORKING DAY AFTER THE PROTEST IS FILED. MERELY MAILING A COPY OF THE PROTEST TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER DOES NOT SATISFY THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT WHICH SPECIFIES ACTUAL RECEIPT OF THE PROTEST BY THE CONTRACTING AGENCY.

SYSTEMS & COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION:

SYSTEMS & COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION (SCT) PROTESTS THE REJECTION OF ITS PROPOSAL UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. RFP-SAAA-6 00814, ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR AN INTEGRATED ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE SYSTEM. WE DISMISS THE PROTEST BECAUSE SCT FAILED TO FURNISH A COPY OF THE PROTEST TO THE CONTRACTING AGENCY WITHIN 1 DAY AFTER THE PROTEST WAS FILED WITH OUR OFFICE.

SECTION 21.1(D) OF OUR BID PROTEST REGULATIONS, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.1(D) (1986), STATES THAT "THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MUST RECEIVE A COPY OF THE PROTEST NO LATER THAN 1 WORKING DAY AFTER THE PROTEST IS FILED" WITH OUR OFFICE. THE BASIS FOR THE 1-DAY NOTICE REQUIREMENT IS FOUND IN THE COMPETITION IN CONTRACTING ACT OF 1984, 31 U.S.C. SEC. 3553 (SUPP. III 1985), WHICH REQUIRES THE CONTRACTING AGENCY TO FILE A WRITTEN REPORT WITH OUR OFFICE WITHIN 25 WORKING DAYS AFTER WE NOTIFY THE AGENCY THAT A PROTEST HAS BEEN FILED. ANY DELAY IN FURNISHING A COPY OF THE PROTEST TO THE CONTRACTING AGENCY NOT ONLY HAMPERS THE AGENCY'S ABILITY TO MEET THE 25-DAY STATUTORY DEADLINE, BUT ALSO FRUSTRATES OUR EFFORTS TO CONSIDER ALL OBJECTIONS TO AGENCY PROCUREMENT ACTIONS IN AS TIMELY A FASHION AS POSSIBLE. CALIFORNIA MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS, B-223614.2, AUG. 19, 1986, 86-2 CPD PARA. 200.

HERE, SCT'S PROTEST LETTER WAS DATED OCTOBER 9, 1986 AND FILED IN OUR OFFICE ON OCTOBER 10. BY LETTER DATED OCTOBER 16, THE CONTRACTING AGENCY ADVISED US THAT IT HAD NOT YET RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PROTEST. SINCE THE CONTRACTING AGENCY DID NOT RECEIVE A COPY OF THE PROTEST WITHIN 1 DAY OF ITS FILING WITH OUR OFFICE, SCT DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT IN 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.1(D).

SCT ARGUES THAT IT COMPLIED WITH THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT BY MAILING A COPY OF THE PROTEST TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ON THE SAME DAY IT SENT THE PROTEST, VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS, TO OUR OFFICE. MERELY MAILING A COPY OF THE PROTEST DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT IN 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.1(D), HOWEVER, SINCE THE REGULATION DEFINES NOTICE AS RECEIPT OF THE PROTEST BY THE CONTRACTING AGENCY. CARLYLE VAN LINES, INC.-- RECONSIDERATION, B-221331.2, JAN. 24, 1986, 86-1 CPD PARA. 89. FURTHER, SINCE THE PROTEST WAS SENT TO OUR OFFICE VIA AN OVERNIGHT DELIVERY SERVICE, SCT COULD NOT REASONABLY ASSUME THAT THE COPY, WHICH WAS SENT BY REGULAR MAIL, WOULD REACH THE CONTRACTING AGENCY WITHIN 1 DAY AFTER THE PROTEST WAS FILED WITH OUR OFFICE.

THE PROTEST IS DISMISSED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs