Matter of: Technical Consulting Group File: B-258415.3 Date: January 13, 1995

B-258415.3: Jan 13, 1995

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

The University of California is a management & operating contractor for the Department of Energy. We dismissed Technical's protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 working days after Technical received actual or constructive knowledge of adverse agency action on its initial agency-level protest. We deny the request for reconsideration because it too is untimely filed. We will not consider a request for reconsideration. Technical's request is dated November 2 but was not received (filed) in our Office until November 22. Its request for reconsideration is untimely [1] filed and will not be considered. 1. Which may have caused the delay from the November 2 date of the letter to the actual date of receipt in our Office.

Matter of: Technical Consulting Group File: B-258415.3 Date: January 13, 1995

(no digest)

DECISION

Technical Consulting Group requests reconsideration of our prior decision of October 19, 1994, dismissing its protest against the award of a contract under request for proposals No. H255900 by the University of California Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The University of California is a management & operating contractor for the Department of Energy. We dismissed Technical's protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 working days after Technical received actual or constructive knowledge of adverse agency action on its initial agency-level protest.

We deny the request for reconsideration because it too is untimely filed.

Our Bid Protest Regulations contain strict rules requiring timely submission of protests, comments, and requests for reconsideration; specifically, a request for reconsideration must be filed within 10 working days after the requesting party knows or should know the basis for reconsideration. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.12(b); MRL. Inc.--Request for Recon., B-235673.4, Aug. 29, 1989, 89-2 CPD Para.188. Where, as here, a party fails to meet our time requirements, we will not consider a request for reconsideration. Technical does not state when it received our decision; therefore, allowing mail-out time, we assume it received our decision not later than October 28. Technical's request is dated November 2 but was not received (filed) in our Office until November 22, more than 10 working days later. The term "filed" under our Bid Protest Regulations means actual "receipt of the protest or other submissions" in our Office. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.0(g) (1994).

Therefore, its request for reconsideration is untimely [1] filed and will not be considered.

1. We note that Technical did not use a correct address on the envelope in which it mailed its request for reconsideration, which may have caused the delay from the November 2 date of the letter to the actual date of receipt in our Office, November 22. Our Bid Protest Regulations are published in the Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations and protesters by law are charged with constructive notice of their contents. Domation Inc., B-228221, Sept. 28, 1987, 87-2 CPD Para. 311. Technical therefore is presumed to be aware of the correct address, which is set fofth in those Regulations, and must bear the consequences of not using it. Bio-Temp Scientific. Inc.--Recon., B-231358.2, June 10, 1988, 88-1 CPD Para. 558.