BNUMBER:  B-274406.2
DATE:  January 3, 1997
TITLE:  Speedy Food Service, Inc.--Reconsideration

**********************************************************************

Matter of:Speedy Food Service, Inc.--Reconsideration

File:     B-274406.2

Date:January 3, 1997

Theodore M. Bailey, Esq., for the protester.
Tania L. Calhoun, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.

DIGEST

Request for reconsideration of General Accounting Office (GAO) 
decision denying protest is dismissed as untimely where it was filed 
more than 10 calendar days after the firm advised GAO that it had 
noted the decision on GAO's World Wide Web Internet site, where bid 
protest decisions generally are posted within 24 hours after issuance.  
It is not relevant that the firm filed the request within 10 days of 
receiving the mailed copy of the decision, since to permit a firm with 
actual knowledge of and access to a decision on its protest to wait 
for receiving a copy in the mail before starting the 10-day 
reconsideration period would be inconsistent with the dual 
requirements reflected in GAO's timeliness rules of giving parties a 
fair opportunity to present their cases and resolving protests 
expeditiously without unduly disrupting or delaying the procurement 
process.  

DECISION

Speedy Food Service, Inc. asks that we reconsider our decision in 
Speedy Food Serv., Inc., B-274406, December 9, 1996, 96-2 CPD ___, in 
which we denied the firm's protest of the award of a contract to Cantu 
Services, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. DABT39-95-R-0002, 
issued by the Department of the Army to obtain food services at Fort 
Sill, Oklahoma.  

We dismiss the request as untimely.  

Our Bid Protest Regulations contain strict rules for the timely 
submission of protests, comments, and requests for reconsideration; 
specifically, a request for reconsideration must be filed within 10 
calendar days after the requesting party knows or should know the 
basis for reconsideration.  Bid Protest Regulations,  sec.  21.14(b), 61 
Fed. Reg. 39039, 39047 (1996) (to be codified at 4 C.F.R. 
 sec.  21.14(b)).  

Speedy filed its reconsideration request in our Office on December 23, 
stating that it received our decision on December 16.  However, our 
records show that Speedy telephoned our Office on December 10 to 
express its concern that the decision, which it noted was on our 
Office's World Wide Web Internet site, contained material covered by a 
protective order.  We generally post our bid protest decisions on our 
Internet site within 24 hours after issuance.  Since Speedy thus 
admittedly had actual knowledge of our decision on December 10, it was 
incumbent on the firm to ask for reconsideration within 10 days of 
that date.  Written notification of a basis for reconsideration is not 
required.  See Swafford Indus., B-238055, Mar. 12, 1990, 90-1 CPD  para.  
268, aff'd, B-238055.2, July 30, 1990, 90-2 CPD  para.  79.  Moreover, to 
permit a firm with actual knowledge of and access to a decision on its 
protest to wait until it receives a copy in the mail before starting 
the 10-day reconsideration period would be inconsistent with the dual 
requirements reflected in our timeliness rules of giving parties a 
fair opportunity to present their cases and resolving protests 
expeditiously without unduly disrupting or delaying the procurement 
process.  See Air Inc.--Recon., B-238220.2, Jan. 29, 1990, 90-1 CPD  para.  
129.  

Accordingly, the request for reconsideration, filed more than 10 days 
after December 10, is dismissed.

Comptroller General
of the United States