GSE, Inc.

B-415135 Sep 22, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights GSE, Inc., of South Lake Tahoe, California, protests the Department of the Army's actions pursuant to broad agency announcement (BAA) Call No. W911W6-17-R-0007 (the solicitation). The solicitation sought proposals to develop and perform engine testing of heavy-fuel systems for unmanned aircraft. GSE protests that the provisions of the solicitation were "seriously flawed," and that the agency improperly evaluated GSE's proposal. We dismiss the protest. We dismiss the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  GSE, Inc. File:  B-415135 Date:  September 22, 2017 Gregory Stevenson, GSE, Inc., for the protester. Jonathan A. Hardage, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Where solicitation is issued under a broad agency announcement (BAA), protest challenging the terms of the solicitation is untimely where protest is submitted after the closing date for submission of proposals. 2.  Protester's challenge to the agency's evaluation of protester's proposal is untimely where protest is filed more than 10 days after protester was advised of its alleged basis for protest. 3.  Protester's wide-ranging speculation regarding the Army's future actions fails to state valid bases for protest, and this Office does not conduct investigations as part of our bid protest function.  DECISION GSE, Inc., of South Lake Tahoe, California, protests the Department of the Army's actions pursuant to broad agency announcement (BAA) Call No. W911W6-17-R-0007 (the solicitation).[1]  The solicitation sought proposals to develop and perform engine testing of heavy-fuel systems for unmanned aircraft.  GSE protests that the provisions of the solicitation were "seriously flawed," and that the agency improperly evaluated GSE's proposal.  We dismiss the protest. On February 24, 2017, the agency posted the solicitation at issue to the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website, seeking proposals to develop and perform engine-level validation for unmanned aircraft to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6.[2]  The solicitation provided that proposals would be evaluated and rated as either category I,category II, or category III,[3] and established a closing date of April 11, 2017.  On or before the closing date, GSE submitted a proposal.  On July 19, the agency notified GSE that its proposal had been evaluated as category II and advised GSE that "sufficient funding is not presently available to make an award."  MTD, Tab 5, GSE Notification, at 1.  Thereafter, GSE and the agency engaged in various communications, during which GSE expressed its dissatisfaction with various aspects of the solicitation/evaluation process and requested a debriefing.  Tab 6, Emails between GSE and Agency.  On August 15, the agency offered GSE an in-person debriefing on either August 22 or August 24, stating "[p]lease advise what day you will be coming to Fort Eustis."  MTD, Tab 7, Email from Agency to GSE.  By email dated August 21, GSE advised the agency that it "respectfully decline[d]" the offered debriefing.  MTD, Tab 11, Email from GSE to Agency.  Accordingly, no debriefing was conducted.[4]  On August 21, GSE filed this protest with our Office, complaining that the solicitation contained various flaws, including assertions that it "lacked key sections"; contained improper modification of FAR clauses; contained an "inadequate description of the metrics that would be used in the source selection"; lacked "clear language" regarding debriefings and protests; and contained an "unreasonable mandate to submit all of the proposal's technical details for evaluation to a foreign-owned evaluator."  Protest at 2-3.  GSE's protest also challenges the agency's evaluation of GSE's proposal as category II, complaining that "the evaluation team does not understand the technical advantages of GSE's approach."  Id. at 6.  Our Bid Protest Regulations contain strict rules for the timely submission of protests.  These rules reflect the dual requirements of giving parties a fair opportunity to present their cases and resolving protests expeditiously without unduly disrupting or delaying the procurement process.  Verizon Wireless, B-406854, B-406854.2, Sept. 17, 2012, 2012 CPD ¶ 260 at 4.  Our timeliness rules specifically require that a protest based upon alleged solicitation improprieties that are apparent prior to the closing time for submission of proposals must be filed before that time.  4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(1); see AmaTerra Envtl. Inc., B-408290.2, Oct. 23, 2013, 2013 CPD ¶ 242 at 3.  Additionally, protests based on other than alleged solicitation improprieties must be filed no later than 10 calendar days after the protester knew, or should have known, the basis for protest.  4 C.F.R.