Latvian Connection, LLC

B-411489 Aug 11, 2015 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Latvian Connection, LLC, of Healdsburg, California, a small business, challenges the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. W912D1-15-R-0014, issued by the Department of the Army to provide and install sunshade canopies at various sites in Kuwait. Specifically, the protester argues that the agency did not provide it adequate time to respond to an amendment to the RFP. We sustain the protest. We sustain the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:      Latvian Connection, LLC File:                B-411489 Date:              August 11, 2015 Keven L. Barnes, Latvian Connection, LLC, for the protester. CPT Ahsan M. Nasar, and Scott N. Flesch, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Katherine I. Riback, Esq., and Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protester’s contention that it did not have a reasonable amount of time to respond to a solicitation amendment is sustained where the record shows that the protester did not have constructive notice of the issuance of the amendment, and did not learn of the amendment until less than 2 business days prior to the revised closing date. DECISION Latvian Connection, LLC, of Healdsburg, California, a small business, challenges the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. W912D1‑15‑R-0014, issued by the Department of the Army to provide and install sunshade canopies at various sites in Kuwait.  Specifically, the protester argues that the agency did not provide it adequate time to respond to an amendment to the RFP. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The Army issued the solicitation on March 20, 2015, to procure sunshade canopies of various dimensions.  The RFP anticipates the award of a fixed-price contract with a cost-reimbursement contract line item number (CLIN) for Defense Base Act insurance.[1]  RFP at 6.  The anticipated value of the contract exceeds $25,000.  Email from Agency to GAO (Aug. 4, 2015). As relevant here, the RFP provides that “all offerors must submit an electronic proposal to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist.”  RFP at 57.  The initial solicitation listed an email address for the contract specialist in three places in the solicitation, including “Contracting Office Points of Contact.”  Id. at 40, 54, 56.  The initial solicitation also included an incorrect version of the contract specialist’s email in a section regarding the site visit.[2]  Id. at 40.  Before proposals were due, the protester sent the agency a question via email about a Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) § 252.236‑7001 contract drawing.  AR, Tab 8, Email from Latvian Connection to the Army (Apr. 15, 2015).  This email was correctly addressed to the contracting officer and the contract specialist.  Id.  Latvian Connection submitted its initial proposal on April 20.  This proposal was sent to the email address listed for the original contracting officer, and was also sent to the incorrect address for the contract specialist.  AR, Tab 10, Email from Latvian Connection of Initial Proposal to Army (April 20, 2015).  As the agency explains, the original contracting officer was away on temporary duty at the time for receipt of proposals, and was therefore not aware that Latvian Connection had submitted a proposal.  AR at 2.  The contract specialist did not receive the proposal because of the error in the email address used by the protester.  Id. Shortly before proposals were due, the record shows that on April 11, the agency assigned a new contracting officer to the procurement; the agency, however, did not update the solicitation to reflect the identity of the new contracting officer until April 28.  Id. at 3 n.1.  On April 28, the agency issued RFP amendment No. 4, which set forth the revised dimensions of the sunshades, provided revised instructions for the submission of proposals, provided contact information for the new contracting officer, and established a new deadline for the submission of proposals of 3 p.m. Kuwait Local Time on May 4.  AR, Tab 11, RFP amend. No. 4 (Apr. 28, 2015).  The agency states that although it provided copies of amendment No. 4 to the offerors that submitted initial proposals, the agency did not provide a copy to Latvian Connection.  AR at 4.  The agency explains that it did not provide a copy of the amendment to Latvian Connection because it was not aware that the protester had submitted a proposal.  The agency explains it was not aware because Latvian Connection’s initial proposal was sent to the incorrect address for the contract specialist, and because the original contracting officer was away on temporary duty at the time the proposal was submitted and was not aware that he had received it.  AR at 4. The agency also posted RFP amendment No.