Skip to main content

B-225394.2, NOV 19, 1986, 86-2 CPD 592

B-225394.2 Nov 19, 1986
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

PROCUREMENT - BID PROTEST - GAO PROCEDURES - GAO DECISIONS - RECONSIDERATION PROCUREMENT - BID PROTEST - GAO PROCEDURES - INFORMATION SUBMISSION TIMELINESS DIGEST: DISMISSAL OF A PROTEST FOR FAILURE TO INCLUDE A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE PROTEST GROUNDS IS AFFIRMED WHERE THE PROTESTER FURNISHED ITS DETAILS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ITS RECONSIDERATION REQUEST FILED NEARLY 1 MONTH AFTER ORIGINAL DEFICIENT PROTEST WAS FILED. WAS DISMISSED THE SAME DAY FOR FAILURE TO STATE A BASIS FOR PROTEST. ADAMS STATED MERELY THAT "THE DECISION TO AWARD THE CONTRACT WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS. " THAT "A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE PROTEST WILL BE FORTHCOMING. " AND THAT "LEAVE IS REQUESTED TO SUPPLEMENT THIS PROTEST WITH A DETAILED STATEMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM THE DATE HEREOF.".

View Decision

B-225394.2, NOV 19, 1986, 86-2 CPD 592

PROCUREMENT - BID PROTEST - GAO PROCEDURES - GAO DECISIONS - RECONSIDERATION PROCUREMENT - BID PROTEST - GAO PROCEDURES - INFORMATION SUBMISSION TIMELINESS DIGEST: DISMISSAL OF A PROTEST FOR FAILURE TO INCLUDE A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE PROTEST GROUNDS IS AFFIRMED WHERE THE PROTESTER FURNISHED ITS DETAILS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ITS RECONSIDERATION REQUEST FILED NEARLY 1 MONTH AFTER ORIGINAL DEFICIENT PROTEST WAS FILED.

THE ADAMS GROUP, INC.-- RECONSIDERATION:

THE ADAMS GROUP, INC. (ADAMS), REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DISMISSAL OF ITS PROTEST CHALLENGING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANOTHER FIRM UNDER SOLICITATION NO. SBD-86-1. ADAMS' PROTEST, RECEIVED OCTOBER 17, 1986, WAS DISMISSED THE SAME DAY FOR FAILURE TO STATE A BASIS FOR PROTEST. UNDER OUR BID PROTEST REGULATIONS, PROTESTS FILED IN OUR OFFICE MUST SET FORTH A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE LEGAL AND FACTUAL GROUNDS OF PROTEST, AND INCLUDE COPIES OF RELEVANT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. 4 C.F.R. SEC. 21.1(F) (1986).

WE AFFIRM THE DISMISSAL.

ADAMS' PROTEST INCLUDED AN OCTOBER 2 LETTER FROM THE CONTRACTING OFFICER DETAILING THE BASIS FOR AWARD, BUT DID NOT IDENTIFY THE AREAS OF THE OCTOBER 2 LETTER WITH WHICH ADAMS TOOK ISSUE OR OTHERWISE PROVIDE A SPECIFIC BASIS OF PROTEST. RATHER, ADAMS STATED MERELY THAT "THE DECISION TO AWARD THE CONTRACT WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS," THAT "A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE PROTEST WILL BE FORTHCOMING," AND THAT "LEAVE IS REQUESTED TO SUPPLEMENT THIS PROTEST WITH A DETAILED STATEMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM THE DATE HEREOF." AS THERE IS NO PROVISION IN OUR REGULATIONS PERMITTING A DELAY IN THE PROTEST PROCESS TO AWAIT DETAILS, WE DISMISSED THE PROTEST.

IN ITS NOVEMBER 5 LETTER (RECEIVED NOVEMBER 12) REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION, ADAMS FOR THE FIRST TIME PROVIDES THE DETAILS OF ITS PROTEST, AND EXPLAINS THAT THE DETAILS WERE NOT FURNISHED EARLIER BECAUSE ADAMS' COUNSEL HAD NOT EARLIER BEEN AVAILABLE TO REVIEW THE MATTER. ADAMS ASKS THAT THE DELAY THEREFORE BE EXCUSED AND THAT WE CONSIDER THE MERITS OF ITS PROTEST.

ADAMS CLEARLY KNEW ITS BASES OF PROTEST FROM THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S OCTOBER 2 LETTER, AND IT THUS WAS INCUMBENT UPON ADAMS TO INCLUDE THESE BASES IN ITS PROTEST TO OUR OFFICE, WITH OR WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL; OUR REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE FILING OF PROTESTS DO NOT VARY DEPENDING UPON THE AVAILABILITY OF LEGAL COUNSEL. WHERE A PROTESTER, WHEN FILING A COMPLAINT, HAS INFORMATION NECESSARY TO EXPLAIN THE BASIS FOR PROTEST, WE WILL NOT EXCUSE THE FAILURE TO FURNISH THIS INFORMATION, AND WE THEREFORE WILL NOT REVERSE A DISMISSAL BASED ON ITS SUBMISSION WITH A RECONSIDERATION REQUEST. ELECTRO METHODS, INC.-- RECONSIDERATION, B-218180.2, APR. 17, 1985, 85-1 CPD PARA. 438.

THE DISMISSAL IS AFFIRMED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs