B-192078, JANUARY 18, 1979

B-192078: Jan 18, 1979

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Ralph O. White
(202) 512-8278
WhiteRO@gao.gov

Kenneth E. Patton
(202) 512-8205
PattonK@gao.gov

 

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

DIGEST: WHERE PROTESTER NOTIFIES GAO THAT IT IS SEEKING RECONSIDERATION BUT FACTUAL OR LEGAL BASIS FOR SEEKING RECONSIDERATION HAS NOT BEEN FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF GAO DECISION. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION. SINCE THE FACTUAL OR LEGAL BASIS FOR SEEKING RECONSIDERATION WAS NOT FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF OUR DECISION. THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION. 4 C.F.R. 20.9 (1978). AN ATTEMPT TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR FILING THE RECONSIDERATION REQUEST IS EVIDENT. THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DISMISSED.

B-192078, JANUARY 18, 1979

DIGEST: WHERE PROTESTER NOTIFIES GAO THAT IT IS SEEKING RECONSIDERATION BUT FACTUAL OR LEGAL BASIS FOR SEEKING RECONSIDERATION HAS NOT BEEN FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF GAO DECISION, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION.

LEWIS MANAGEMENT AND SERVICE COMPANY-- RECONSIDERATION:

BY TWX DATED NOVEMBER 2, 1978, THE PROTESTER ACKNOWLEDGED RECEIPT OF OUR DECISION IN THE MATTER OF LEWIS MANAGEMENT AND SERVICE COMPANY, B-192078, OCTOBER 18, 1978, 78-2 CPD 286. THE PROTESTER REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION AND STATED THAT A DETAILED ANALYSIS REGARDING THE REQUEST WOULD FOLLOW.

THE PROTESTER, HOWEVER, HAS NOT SUBMITTED A DETAILED ANALYSIS. SINCE THE FACTUAL OR LEGAL BASIS FOR SEEKING RECONSIDERATION WAS NOT FILED WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF OUR DECISION, THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS UNTIMELY AND NOT FOR CONSIDERATION. 4 C.F.R. 20.9 (1978). IN DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; INTERNATIONAL COMPUTAPRINT CORPORATION, 57 COMP.GEN. 615 (1978), 78-2 CPD 84, WE STATED AS FOLLOWS:

"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."

BASED ON THE FOREGOING, THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DISMISSED.

Aug 4, 2020

Jul 31, 2020

Jul 30, 2020

Jul 29, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here