Skip to main content

B-195844.3, JAN 10, 1980

B-195844.3 Jan 10, 1980
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DIGEST: WHERE FACTUAL AND LEGAL BASIS FOR REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF DISMISSAL OF PROTEST IS NOT FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF GAO DECISION. REQUEST IS UNTIMELY AND WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. WHICH INDICATES THAT OUR DECISION WAS RECEIVED BY DECEMBER 6. WAS FILED IN OUR OFFICE ON DECEMBER 11. REQUIRES THAT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BE FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE BASIS FOR RECONSIDERATION IS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN. WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. AN ATTEMPT TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR FILING THE RECONSIDERATION REQUEST IS EVIDENT. THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DISMISSED.

View Decision

B-195844.3, JAN 10, 1980

DIGEST: WHERE FACTUAL AND LEGAL BASIS FOR REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF DISMISSAL OF PROTEST IS NOT FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF GAO DECISION, REQUEST IS UNTIMELY AND WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION BUREAU - RECONSIDERATION:

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION BUREAU (NATIONAL) REQUESTS THAT WE RECONSIDER OUR DECISION IN NATIONAL INVESTIGATION BUREAU, B-195844.2, NOVEMBER 30, 1979, 79-2 CPD 386, IN WHICH WE DISMISSED THE FIRM'S PROTEST AGAINST BOTH THE FAILURE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE TO EXERCISE ITS OPTION UNDER A CONTRACT WITH NATIONAL FOR SECURITY SERVICES, AND THAT AGENCY'S PROPOSED AWARD TO ANOTHER FIRM OF A NEW CONTRACT FOR THE SERVICES.

NATIONAL'S REQUEST, WHICH INDICATES THAT OUR DECISION WAS RECEIVED BY DECEMBER 6, WAS FILED IN OUR OFFICE ON DECEMBER 11, AND MERELY EXPRESSES DISAGREEMENT WITH OUR POSITION. HOWEVER, SECTION 20.9 OF OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES, 4 C.F.R. PART 20 (1979), REQUIRES THAT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BE FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE BASIS FOR RECONSIDERATION IS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, AND CONTAIN A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL BASIS FOR SEEKING RECONSIDERATION. AS WE STATED IN DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; INTERNATIONAL COMPUTAPRINT CORPORATION, 57 COMP.GEN. 615, 619 (1978), 78-2 CPD 84:

"WHEN A PROTESTER, AN INTERESTED PARTY, OR A CONTRACTING AGENCY TIMELY FILES A SHORT NOTE INDICATING GENERAL DISAGREEMENT WITH AN EARLIER DECISION AND SUBSEQUENTLY PROVIDES THE REQUIRED DETAILED STATEMENT AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE RECONSIDERATION PERIOD, AN ATTEMPT TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR FILING THE RECONSIDERATION REQUEST IS EVIDENT. WE CANNOT CONDONE SUCH ACTION BECAUSE TO DO SO WOULD OPEN THE DOOR TO POTENTIAL PROTRACTED DELAYS POSSIBLY RESULTING IN CIRCUMSTANCES NEGATING RECOMMENDED REMEDIAL ACTION IN THE EARLIER DECISION."

SINCE THE REQUIRED DETAILED STATEMENT HAS NOT BEEN FILED WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD, THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DISMISSED. LEWIS MANAGEMENT AND SERVICE COMPANY - RECONSIDERATION, B-192078, JANUARY 18, 1979, 79-1 CPD 29.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs