B-209018.2, MAR 22, 1983

B-209018.2, MAR 22, 1983

DIGEST: WHEN PROTESTER REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF GAO DECISION HAS NOT SHOWN ANY ERROR OF LAW OR PRESENTED ANY FACTS WHICH GAO DID NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDER, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DENIED.

TOM SHAW, INC. - RECONSIDERATION:

TOM SHAW, INC. (TOM SHAW), REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION IN TOM SHAW, INC., B-209018, FEBRUARY 3, 1983, 83-1 CPD 123, IN WHICH WE DENIED ITS PROTEST OF THE REJECTION BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS OF A TELEGRAPHIC BID MODIFICATION (TIME/DATE STAMPED 3 MINUTES AFTER BID OPENING) AS LATE.

AS ITS BASIS FOR RECONSIDERATION, TOM SHAW ALLEGES THAT WESTERN UNION RECORDS OF THE TRANSMITTAL TIME OF THE MODIFICATION SHOW THAT EITHER THE GOVERNMENT TIME/DATE STAMP WAS NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY, OR THE MODIFICATION WAS MISHANDLED BY THE GOVERNMENT. IN OUR DECISION, WE CONSIDERED THE ABOVE CONTENTIONS AND THE WESTERN UNION EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, TOM SHAW HAS NOT PRESENTED ANY ERROR OF LAW OR ANY NEW MATTER OF FACT NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED, EXCEPT CITING SIERRA ENGINEERING COMPANY, 55 COMP.GEN. 1146 (1976), 76-1 CPD 342, WHICH WE FIND TO BE DISTINGUISHABLE. THERE, WE APPROVED THE DISREGARDING OF AN AGENCY TIME/DATE STAMP BECAUSE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE SHOWED THAT THE TIME/DATE STAMP WAS GROSSLY INACCURATE AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE MAINTAINED BY THE GOVERNMENT INSTALLATION ESTABLISHED THAT A BID MODIFICATION WAS RECEIVED PRIOR TO BID OPENING.

ACCORDINGLY, WE AFFIRM OUR PRIOR DECISION. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.9(A) (1982). S.A.F.E. EXPORT CORPORATION, B-203346.2, APRIL 6, 1982, 82-1 CPD 314.