B-242934.2, Mar 21, 1991, 91-1 CPD 313

B-242934.2: Mar 21, 1991

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Shirley Jones
(202) 512-8156
jonessa@gao.gov

 

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

A protest is filed when actually received by our Office. We dismissed the protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 days after the protester knew. Or should have known of the basis for its protest. Danville protested that a proposal offering this price could not have complied with the RFP's requirements. Our Bid Protest Regulations require that a protest challenging the award of a contract must be filed no later than 10 working days after the protester knew or should have known of the basis for protest. 4 C.F.R. Since Danville's protest was based on information it obtained on January 30. The protest was properly dismissed as untimely filed. The dismissal is affirmed.

B-242934.2, Mar 21, 1991, 91-1 CPD 313

PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - Protest timeliness - Effective dates - Facsimile

DIGEST

Attorneys

Danville-Findorff, Inc. -- Reconsideration:

Danville-Findorff, Inc. (Danville) requests reconsideration of our February 14, 1991, dismissal of its protest challenging the award of a contract to Griffin Services, Inc., by the Department of the Treasury under request for proposals (RFP) No. CS-90-041. We dismissed the protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 days after the protester knew, or should have known of the basis for its protest. We affirm our dismissal.

In its reconsideration request, Danville states that on January 30, 1991, it received written notice from the Department of Treasury that award had been made to another offeror at a price of $971,375. Based on this notice, Danville protested that a proposal offering this price could not have complied with the RFP's requirements, and that the agency improperly failed to comply with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements for conducting discussions prior to contract award. Danville asserts that it sent this protest to our Office via telefax on February 11, 1991. However, our records show that our Office did not receive any telefax transmission from Danville, and that we received the original copy of Danville's protest on February 14, 1991. Our Bid Protest Regulations require that a protest challenging the award of a contract must be filed no later than 10 working days after the protester knew or should have known of the basis for protest. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(2) (1990). The term "filed" as defined in our Regulations means receipt of the protest in GAO. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.0(g). A protester relying on telefax equipment to file a protest does so at its own risk and GAO's nonreceipt of the protest does not serve as a basis for waiving our timeliness rules. See Sioux Falls Shopping News -- Recon., B-236421.2, Oct. 30, 1989, 89-2 CPD Para. 394; Koger Properties, Inc. -- Recon., B-230090.2, Feb. 12, 1988, 88-1 CPD Para. 146.

Since Danville's protest was based on information it obtained on January 30, 1991, more than 10 working days prior to GAO's receipt of its protest on February 14, the protest was properly dismissed as untimely filed.

The dismissal is affirmed.

Nov 25, 2020

Nov 24, 2020

Nov 20, 2020

Nov 19, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here