The protester filed a bid protest. The agency took corrective action to reevaluate but reaffirmed the award. The protester then filed a size protest, but the size protest was untimely. The size protest should’ve been filed within five days of the initial award, not after the corrective action.
Size Appeal of Glacier Technologies, LLC, Re: Dynamo Technologies, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-6217
- Untimely Size Protest – The agency awarded a contract in May 2022. A disappointed bidder filed a GAO protest. The agency took corrective action to reevaluate. Following the corrective action, the agency reaffirmed the award. The protester filed a size protest in September 2022. The SBA dismissed the size protest as untimely, reasoning the protest should’ve been filed within five days of the award in May 2022.
- Corrective Action In Bid Protest Didn’t Toll Size Protest – The protester argued the corrective action resulted in a new award, and its protest was filed within five days of the new award. OHA, however, found the agency never canceled the initial award, so the corrective action didn’t result in a new award. Unless the corrective action nullifies an initial award, a corrective action in a bid protest does not extend the deadline for a size protests.
- Protest Still Untimely Regardless of Corrective Action – OHA noted the protest would be untimely even if the corrective action had invalidated the initial award. The protester challenged size in connection with a task order under a long term IDIQ contract. A size protest of a task order would only be timely if IDIQ holders had been required to recertify.
The protester is represented by Robert K. Tompkins, Hillary J. Freund, and Kelsey M. Hayes of Holland & Knight LLP. The awardee is represented by Noah B. Bleicher, Carla J. Weiss, and Aime J. Joo of Jenner & Block LLP.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
