B-243170, Mar 11, 1991, 91-1 CPD 270
Highlights
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - Protest timeliness - 10 day rule DIGEST Protest of solicitation amendment received 1 day before proposals were due is untimely where not filed within 10 days of date protester received the amendment. Proposals in response to the RFP were due on February 15. As ImageMatrix is not listed on the QVPL. ImageMatrix asserts that the amendment was improper because it was not received until the day before proposals were due. ImageMatrix's protest of the QVPL requirement concerns an alleged impropriety incorporated into the RFP that is apparent on the face of the amendment. Since ImageMatrix did not receive the amendment until 1 day before proposals were due.
B-243170, Mar 11, 1991, 91-1 CPD 270
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - Protest timeliness - 10 day rule
DIGEST
Attorneys
ImageMatrix, Inc.:
ImageMatrix, Inc. protests an amendment to request for proposals (RFP) No. NEH-91-TVE-3, issued by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) for production of a video to promote NEH programs.
We dismiss the protest as untimely filed.
Proposals in response to the RFP were due on February 15, 1991. ImageMatrix completed preparation of its proposal on February 14. On that date, ImageMatrix received a copy of an amendment to the RFP dated February 8 stating that all offerors must be listed on the Qualified Videotape Producers List (QVPL). As ImageMatrix is not listed on the QVPL, the amendment effectively excluded the firm from the competition.
ImageMatrix asserts that the amendment was improper because it was not received until the day before proposals were due, after ImageMatrix had expended time and resources preparing its proposal.
ImageMatrix's protest of the QVPL requirement concerns an alleged impropriety incorporated into the RFP that is apparent on the face of the amendment. Generally, to be timely under our Bid Protest Regulations, such a protest must be filed prior to the next closing date for receipt of proposals following the incorporation. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(1) (1990). In this case, however, since ImageMatrix did not receive the amendment until 1 day before proposals were due, section 21.2(a)(1) is inapplicable because ImageMatrix did not have a reasonable opportunity to file its protest before the due date. The Big Picture Co., B-210535, Feb. 17, 1983, 83-1 CPD Para. 166. Instead, ImageMatrix was required to file its protest no later than 10 working days from the time it learned of its basis for protest. Id; 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(2). We received ImageMatrix's protest on March 4, 12 working days after it learned of the amendment excluding it from the competition. The protest therefore is untimely and will not be considered.
The protest is dismissed.