13.106-3(c) states, "Notification. For acquisitions that do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold and for which automatic notification is not provided through an electronic commerce method that employs widespread electronic public notice, notification to unsuccessful suppliers shall be given only if requested or required by 5.301."  If a Part 13 supply acquisition meets the no notice requirement (absent requesting award status), then how is a prospective contractor supposed to know whether she was an unsuccessfull supplier?  If an unsuccessful contractor disagrees with a no notice award, then what date will be used to determine whether  the basis of protest is known or should have been known.  Should it be the contract award date?  Should it be whenever the contractor finds out (e.g., the contractor contacts government on award status 30 days after award)?  Thoughts?

There is no bright line test for determining when an offeror knew or should have known of a basis for a protest.  This is a determination that is made on a case-by-case basis and depends on the facts of the specific procurement.

16 hours ago, charles said:

If a Part 13 supply acquisition meets the no notice requirement (absent requesting award status), then how is a prospective contractor supposed to know whether she was an unsuccessfull supplier?

What are you even trying to ask? Your previous sentence cites the two ways an offeror is notified of their lack of success: either by a required notice or by requesting notification.  Assuming an prospective contractor wants to know whether she was unsuccessful, why wouldn't the contractor simply "request award status?"  The premise of your line of questioning is silly.

 

Matt.  What a silly statement.   My question is focused on protest timeliness and contractor knowledge.   If a contractor requested an award status 30 days after award, then would a potential protest be considered timely?  Retreadfed's response addresses the original question.    Maybe, the above regulation should be revised to require a notification of award?  Your silly thoughts?    

So instead of asking five questions in your original post and creating a lot of noise, why not simply ask:

42 minutes ago, charles said:

If a contractor requested an award status 30 days after award, then would a potential protest be considered timely? 

 

42 minutes ago, charles said:

Retreadfed's response addresses the original question.

What was your original question?  I counted five...is it the one that came first, last,...?

EDIT: Clearly my use of the word "silly" got to you which wasn't my intent so my apologies for that.  I'd edit it out of my original post, but then that would simply make your response look, well "silly"

Matt, if I followed your suggestion, my original question would lack context, since my question is based on a particular acquisition that does not require an FBO award notification.   For example, some acquisitions require notifications and debriefs, which affect timeliness protest rules.   The word silly does not bother me.   I genuinely think your responses have been unhelpful.   

To each their own I suppose, best of luck to you charles.

Charles, I have not done such a search, but have you searched GAO bid protest decisions to see if your question has been answered?

GAO has held that the timeliness of the protest depends on at what point the basis for the protest is known or should have been known.  Take a look at this somewhat recent decision:

https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/687324.pdf