Skip to main content

B-197749.2, FEB 9, 1981

B-197749.2 Feb 09, 1981
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DIGEST: REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED WHERE PROTESTER TIMELY FILES SHORT NOTICE INDICATING GENERAL DISAGREEMENT WITH PRIOR DECISION BUT FAILS TO PROVIDE DETAILED STATEMENT WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER BASIS FOR RECONSIDERATION WAS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN. AUTOVON IS A "SPECIAL ASSEMBLY" SERVICE WHICH IS PROVIDED TO MEET THE UNIQUE AND COMPLEX NEEDS OF A SPECIFIC CUSTOMER. WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO POSSIBLE REGULATORY RATE REVISION. AS OFFERING "FIRM" PRICES TO BE REASONABLE SINCE THE AGENCY'S SPECIFIC HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE IN LEASING AUTOVON SPECIAL ASSEMBLY SERVICES INDICATED THAT THE TARIFFED RATES WERE GENERALLY MAINTAINED BY THE TELEPHONE COMPANIES OVER THE CONTRACT TERM.

View Decision

B-197749.2, FEB 9, 1981

DIGEST: REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED WHERE PROTESTER TIMELY FILES SHORT NOTICE INDICATING GENERAL DISAGREEMENT WITH PRIOR DECISION BUT FAILS TO PROVIDE DETAILED STATEMENT WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER BASIS FOR RECONSIDERATION WAS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN.

ANCHORAGE TELEPHONE UTILITY - RECONSIDERATION:

ANCHORAGE TELEPHONE UTILITY (ATU) REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION, ANCHORAGE TELEPHONE UTILITY, B-197749, NOVEMBER 20, 1980, 80-2 CPD 386, IN WHICH WE DENIED ATU'S PROTEST CONCERNING THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR TELEPHONE SERVICES TO ANOTHER FIRM BY THE DEFENSE COMMERCIAL COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE, DEFENSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY (DCA) UNDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. DCA 200-78-R-0024.

THE RFP REQUESTED OFFERS FOR THE LEASE OF TWO "AUTOVON" SWITCHES IN THE ANCHORAGE AND FAIRBANKS AREAS OF ALASKA. AUTOVON IS A "SPECIAL ASSEMBLY" SERVICE WHICH IS PROVIDED TO MEET THE UNIQUE AND COMPLEX NEEDS OF A SPECIFIC CUSTOMER. OUR DECISION FOUND DCA'S DETERMINATION TO EVALUATE THE PRICE PROPOSALS RECEIVED FROM COMMUNICATIONS COMMON CARRIERS, WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO POSSIBLE REGULATORY RATE REVISION, AS OFFERING "FIRM" PRICES TO BE REASONABLE SINCE THE AGENCY'S SPECIFIC HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE IN LEASING AUTOVON SPECIAL ASSEMBLY SERVICES INDICATED THAT THE TARIFFED RATES WERE GENERALLY MAINTAINED BY THE TELEPHONE COMPANIES OVER THE CONTRACT TERM.

ATU FILED ITS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION ON DECEMBER 9, 1980. THE REQUEST CONTAINED ONLY A BRIEF STATEMENT DISAGREEING WITH OUR PRIOR DECISION AND REITERATING ATU'S PRIOR CONTENTION THAT ATU'S OWN HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE WITH SPECIAL ASSEMBLY SERVICES INDICATED THAT COMMUNICATIONS COMMON CARRIERS DID NOT IN FACT MAINTAIN THEIR TARIFFED RATES OVER THE CONTRACT TERM. (IN ITS INITIAL PROTEST, ATU HAD MAINTAINED THAT DCA'S DETERMINATION TO EVALUATE PRICE PROPOSALS RECEIVED FROM COMMUNICATIONS COMMON CARRIERS AS OFFERING "FIRM" PRICES WAS "CONTRARY TO HISTORICAL DATA ON RATE INCREASES OF REGULATED CARRIERS.") ATU CONCLUDED WITH THE STATEMENT THAT "MORE INFORMATION WILL BE SUBMITTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE." ATU FILED ITS DETAILED STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF ITS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION ON JANUARY 6, 1981, MORE THAN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE BASIS OF ITS REQUEST WAS KNOWN.

WE WILL NOT CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION BECAUSE ATU FAILED TO TIMELY SUBMIT A DETAILED STATEMENT. OUR BID PROTEST PROCEDURES REQUIRE THAT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION CONTAIN A DETAILED STATEMENT SPECIFYING ANY ERROR OF LAW MADE OR INFORMATION NOT CONSIDERED BY OUR PRIOR DECISION, AND THAT THE REQUEST MUST BE FILED NOT LATER THAN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE BASIS FOR RECONSIDERATION IS KNOWN OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 20.9 (1980). THE MERE STATEMENT THAT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION EXISTS AND WILL BE FORTHCOMING DOES NOT FULFILL THAT REQUIREMENT. MEGAPULSE, INC. - RECONSIDERATION, B-194986, MAY 21, 1980, 80-1 CPD 350. WHERE AS HERE A PROTESTER TIMELY FILES A SHORT NOTICE INDICATING GENERAL DISAGREEMENT WITH AN EARLIER DECISION AND SUBSEQUENTLY PROVIDES THE REQUIRED DETAILED STATEMENT AFTER EXPIRATION OF THE 10 WORKING DAY RECONSIDERATION PERIOD, THE PROTESTER IN EFFECT IS ATTEMPTING TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR RECONSIDERATION.

WE WILL NOT PERMIT SUCH ATTEMPTS BECAUSE THEY WOULD OPEN THE DOOR TO POTENTIAL PROTRACTED DELAYS POSSIBLY RESULTING IN CIRCUMSTANCES NEGATING ANY REMEDIAL ACTION WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED IN THE EARLIER DECISION, AND WE WILL NOT GRANT ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE, NOT EVEN WHERE A PROTESTER BELIEVES IT HAS RECEIVED EXPRESS PRIOR APPROVAL TO DELAY FILING ITS DETAILED STATEMENT BEYOND THE 10 WORKING DAY PERIOD. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; INTERNATIONAL COMPUTAPRINT CORPORATION, 57 COMP. GEN. 615 (1978), 78-2 CPD 84.

SINCE ATU FAILED TO SUBMIT THE REQUIRED DETAILED STATEMENT WITHIN THE 10 WORKING DAY PERIOD, WE WILL NOT RECONSIDER OUR PRIOR DECISION. SEE MARYLAND MACHINE TOOL SALES, B-196443, JUNE 2, 1980, 80-1 CPD 373.

THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DISMISSED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs