Skip to main content

Matter of: New Beginnings Treatment Center, Inc.-- Reconsideration File: B-252517.2; B-252517.3 Date: April 29, 1993

B-252517.2,B-252517.3 Apr 29, 1993
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

PROCUREMENT Bid Protests GAO procedures Protest timeliness 10-day rule Reconsideration motions Request for reconsideration of a General Accounting Office dismissal of a protest as untimely is denied as untimely where the protester failed to request reconsideration within 10 working days from its receipt of the dismissal. PROCUREMENT Bid Protests GAO procedures Protest timeliness 10-day rule Where a protest was dismissed as untimely. Is also untimely. That the agency may have misevaluated the RFP requirement that the contractor prove that "local law enforcement and local government have been advised of the contractor's intent to open a community corrections center. We dismissed the protest as untimely since it was not received in our Office within 10 working days from when New Beginnings knew of its basis of protest.

View Decision

Matter of: New Beginnings Treatment Center, Inc.-- Reconsideration File: B-252517.2; B-252517.3 Date: April 29, 1993

PROCUREMENT Bid Protests GAO procedures Protest timeliness 10-day rule Reconsideration motions Request for reconsideration of a General Accounting Office dismissal of a protest as untimely is denied as untimely where the protester failed to request reconsideration within 10 working days from its receipt of the dismissal. PROCUREMENT Bid Protests GAO procedures Protest timeliness 10-day rule Where a protest was dismissed as untimely, a "new" protest on the same basic grounds based upon additional information discovered after the dismissal of the prior protest, is also untimely.

Attorneys

DECISION New Beginnings Treatment Center, Inc. requests reconsideration of our March 3, 1993, dismissal of its protest as untimely. New Beginnings also files a "new" protest based upon subsequently obtained evidence, which allegedly substantiates its previously dismissed protest.

We deny the request for reconsideration and dismiss the protest.

By letter dated February 9, New Beginnings protested the award of a contract to Behavioral Systems Southwest under request for proposals (RFP) No. 200-081-W by the Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, for community treatment center services in Tucson, Arizona. New Beginnings contended, among other things, that the agency may have misevaluated the RFP requirement that the contractor prove that "local law enforcement and local government have been advised of the contractor's intent to open a community corrections center," and that appropriate licenses had not been obtained by the awardee.

We dismissed the protest as untimely since it was not received in our Office within 10 working days from when New Beginnings knew of its basis of protest, as required by the Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(2) (1993). In this regard, while the protest letter states that the grounds of protest were known no later than February 9, when it was apparently mailed, the protest was not received by our Office until March 2 because it was misaddressed by the protester.

New Beginnings requests reconsideration on the basis that it was given the erroneous address by an unidentified individual who answered a phone number listed in a General Accounting Office (GAO) audit report for obtaining copies of audit reports and because GAO's address was not in the solicitation.

We deny New Beginnings's request for reconsideration because it also was filed in an untimely manner. Our Bid Protest Regulations contain strict rules requiring the 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); see MRL, Inc.- -Recon., B-235673.4, Aug. 29, 1989, 89-2 CPD Para. 188. Our records indicate that New Beginnings was sent a copy of our dismissal dated March 3 on March 9. For purposes of calculating timeliness, absent evidence to the contrary, we assume that mail is received within 1 calendar week from the date it is sent. See Insituform East, Inc., B-248954, Sept. 15, 1992, 92-2 CPD Para. 181. Thus, we impute the protester's receipt of our dismissal to have occurred no later than March 16. New Beginnings's request for reconsideration was filed on April 1, which is more than 10 working days later. Therefore, we consider New Beginnings's request for reconsideration to be untimely filed.

As noted above, New Beginnings also has filed a new protest of the award. This protest is based upon a March 23 article in the Arizona Daily Star, which New Beginnings asserts is verification of the validity of its earlier dismissed protest that local officials did not receive notification of Behavioral's intent to open its correction center until March 12, well after award of the contract; that the community does not support the facility; and that Behavioral does not possess the appropriate license as required by the RFP.

Although New Beginnings may have obtained additional support for its initial protest from the March 23 article, the fact remains that the protest grounds being raised are essentially the same as those raised originally in its previous dismissed protest that was dismissed as untimely. An untimely protest cannot be made timely by virtue of the protester's later acquisition of additional information in support of the protest. Advanced Health Sys.--Recon., B-246793.2, Feb. 21, 1992, 92-1 CPD Para. 214. Consequently, New Beginnings's new protest is also dismissed as untimely.

The request for reconsideration is denied, and the protest is dismissed.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs