B-243823.2, Jul 3, 1991, 91-2 CPD ***
Highlights
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Dismissal of protest as untimely is affirmed where the protester knew the basis of its protest (rejection of its quote) more than 10 working days prior to filing its protest. Protester may not delay filing protest until after receipt of notice of award of contract when it is the rejection of its quote and not the award which forms the protest basis. Aero was informed of the award to Aim Enterprises on April 16. Our Bid Protest Regulations require that protests such as this one be filed no later than 10 working days after the basis of protest is known or should have been known. Whichever is earlier. 4 C.F.R.
B-243823.2, Jul 3, 1991, 91-2 CPD ***
PROCUREMENT - Bid Protests - GAO procedures - GAO decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: Dismissal of protest as untimely is affirmed where the protester knew the basis of its protest (rejection of its quote) more than 10 working days prior to filing its protest. Protester may not delay filing protest until after receipt of notice of award of contract when it is the rejection of its quote and not the award which forms the protest basis.
Attorneys
Aero Components Company of Arlington, Inc.-- Reconsideration:
Aero Components Company of Arlington, Inc. requests reconsideration of our May 2, 1991, dismissal as untimely, of its April 29, 1991, protest against the rejection of its quote, submitted in response to solicitation No. DLA400-91-Q-L044, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency.
We affirm our decision.
Aero, in its initial protest, argued that the agency did not provide a fair and adequate evaluation of the technical data contained in its quote which led to the rejection of its quote. The agency rejected Aero's quote on April 2, 1991, and Aero received notification of this rejection on April 8. Aero was informed of the award to Aim Enterprises on April 16, and then filed its protest with our Office on April 29.
Our Bid Protest Regulations require that protests such as this one be filed no later than 10 working days after the basis of protest is known or should have been known, whichever is earlier. 4 C.F.R. Sec. 21.2(a)(2) (1991). Since Aero's protest, filed on April 29, was not filed within 10 working days of April 8, the date on which Aero received notification from the agency that based on its technical data its quote had been rejected, Aero's protest was not timely filed.
In its reconsideration request, Aero asserts that its protest was timely filed on April 29, because it was filed within 9 working days of its learning of award. However, it is the rejection of Aero's quote and not the award to Aim Enterprises which forms the basis of the protest. Consequently, Aero's protest filed on April 29, more than 10 working days after it received notification of its rejection, was untimely. Swafford Indus., B-230855, Mar. 12, 1990, 90-1 CPD Para. 268, aff'd, B-238055.2, July 30, 1990, 90-2 CPD Para. 79.