B-241036.2, Oct 22, 1990, 90-2 CPD ***

B-241036.2: Oct 22, 1990

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Dismissal of protest is affirmed where the protest against the specifications was filed at the agency with the protester's bid. Base Services claims our dismissal was erroneous since its protest to our Office was filed within 10 working days of when it was notified that its agency-level protest was denied. Are required to be filed. Cannot properly be considered filed before bid opening since the contracting officer is not authorized to open bids until the time set for bid opening. Since Base Services' agency- level protest was untimely. The dismissal is affirmed. /1/ Base Services was inadvertently sent a dismissal notice advising that its agency-level protest was untimely because it was not filed within 10 working days of actual or constructive knowledge of the adverse agency action.

B-241036.2, Oct 22, 1990, 90-2 CPD ***

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Dismissal of protest is affirmed where the protest against the specifications was filed at the agency with the protester's bid, since such protests must be filed prior to bid opening.

Attorneys

Base Services, Inc.-- Reconsideration:

Base Services, Inc. requests reconsideration of our dismissal as untimely of its protest against invitation for bids (IFB) No. N62467-90 B-7186, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Support Activity, New Orleans, Louisiana, for maintenance and repair services for base and off-base family housing units.

We affirm the dismissal.

On August 9, 1990, Base Services submitted its bid together with an agency-level protest that the IFB did not properly set forth the requirements to submit an acceptable bond from an individual surety. August 29, the Navy orally notified Base Services that its protest of the alleged defect, had been denied. Base Services then protested to our Office on September 6. On September 7, we dismissed Base Services' protest as untimely under our Bid Protest Regulations. /1/ 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(3) (1990).

On reconsideration, Base Services claims our dismissal was erroneous since its protest to our Office was filed within 10 working days of when it was notified that its agency-level protest was denied. However, protests based upon alleged improprieties in IFBs, as here, are required to be filed, either with the agency or with our Office, prior to bid opening. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(1). A letter of protest of alleged solicitation defects, submitted with a bid, cannot properly be considered filed before bid opening since the contracting officer is not authorized to open bids until the time set for bid opening. Americover Co., B-234352, Mar. 28, 1989, 89-1 CPD Para. 320. Since Base Services' agency- level protest was untimely, its protest on the same basis to our Office must also be considered untimely. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(3).

The dismissal is affirmed.

/1/ Base Services was inadvertently sent a dismissal notice advising that its agency-level protest was untimely because it was not filed within 10 working days of actual or constructive knowledge of the adverse agency action. However, Base Services' protest was actually untimely because it was not filed prior to bid opening.