[Request for Reconsideration]

B-209236.2: Dec 21, 1982

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm requested reconsideration of a decision which dismissed as untimely its protest of the rejection of its bid as technically unacceptable. The protester stated that GAO overlooked certain facts in making its decision, and it submitted additional information which it believed should be considered in determining the timeliness of its protest. The protester contended that: (1) its protest was timely, because it was filed within 10 days of a technical meeting with the agency and the contracting officer led it to believe that a protest filed after this meeting would be timely; (2) the meeting was to be a discussion of its technical proposal and not a debriefing and, therefore, it concluded that its proposal was still being considered; and (3) the agency's notification that the protester's proposal was being rejected was not sent to its authorized negotiator, but to its sales office. GAO found that: (1) since the agency's letter to the protester stated that it would not receive further consideration for award, there was no reason for the protester to believe that the scheduled meeting was anything other than a debriefing; and (2) the protester's allegation that its delay in protesting was the result of the agency's actions did not excuse it from complying with timeliness requirements. GAO has held that actual notification to the designated company officials is not required to commence the start of the 10-day filing requirement under bid protest procedures. Accordingly, the prior decision was affirmed.