Aurora Storage Products, Inc.

B-415628 Dec 01, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Aurora Storage Products, Inc., of Aurora, Illinois, protests the issuance of a General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order to Tennsco Corp., of Dickson, Tennessee, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. DJJE-17-RFQ-1066, issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for file storage systems. The protester argues that the agency improperly eliminated its quotation from consideration for award, failed to timely notify Aurora of the award decision, and failed to adequately respond to Aurora's agency-level protest. We dismiss the protest as untimely. We dismiss the protest as untimely. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Aurora Storage Products, Inc. File:  B-415628 Date:  December 1, 2017 Patrick J. Reeks for the protester. John R. Caterini, Esq., and Kristen Bucher Hahn, Esq, Department of Justice, for the agency. Alexander O. Levine, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest alleging that agency improperly eliminated quotation from consideration is dismissed as untimely where protester failed to file its protest within 10 days of learning its basis for protest, and where the agency did not act adversely with respect to the protester’s agency-level protest. DECISION Aurora Storage Products, Inc., of Aurora, Illinois, protests the issuance of a General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order to Tennsco Corp., of Dickson, Tennessee, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. DJJE-17-RFQ-1066, issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for file storage systems.  The protester argues that the agency improperly eliminated its quotation from consideration for award, failed to timely notify Aurora of the award decision, and failed to adequately respond to Aurora’s agency-level protest. We dismiss the protest as untimely. The RFQ was issued on August 4, 2017, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, to acquire high density file systems for three floors.  On August 21, Mid-Atlantic Filing Distributors submitted a quotation in response to the RFQ.  The protester asserts that Mid-Atlantic, as Aurora’s authorized GSA dealer, submitted the quotation on behalf of Aurora.[1] The agency reviewed the submitted quotation and determined it ineligible for award because Mid-Atlantic does not hold a GSA FSS contract.  Dismissal Req. at 2.  On September 26, the agency issued the subject task order to Tennsco.  On October 10, the contracting officer informed Aurora of the DOJ’s award decision. On October 13, Aurora filed a timely agency-level protest with the contracting officer.  The protest requested a “thorough review” of the award decision and an “immediate cessation of all contract activities related to this order.”  Agency-Level Protest at 1.  The agency-level protest challenged the agency’s failure to consider the submitted quotation, the agency’s award to the higher-priced Tennsco, and the agency’s failure to provide prompt notice of the award to Aurora. On October 17, the contracting officer acknowledged Aurora’s protest and stated that she would provide a response as soon as possible.  Dismissal Req., Ex. A, Email Chain, at 4.  The protester responded by stating “[t]hank you for your acknowledgment but I have forwarded basically the same request to the [Office of the Inspector General (OIG)].  My intent was to stay within Justice at this time but I’m asking for an OIG review.”  Id. at 3.  The contracting officer responded to this email by asking if the protester was withdrawing its agency-level protest.[2]  Aurora replied that it was not withdrawing its protest, but explained that “[w]e are protesting through the Department of Justice OIG.  We do not expect a review from you personally but rather from your OIG.”  Id. at 2. On October 24, the contracting officer responded to this email by clarifying that an allegation submitted to the OIG would be handled differently than an agency-level protest: Please understand that the OIG does not typically review and handle protests.  They may review your allegations as they would any allegation, in accordance with their ordinary internal procedures and priorities, but the extent to which they will consult your views or keep you informed of any findings is within their discretion.  They also may decline to consider your allegations at all, and may or may not inform you of this decision. Please confirm that you nevertheless still do not want a written decision from me but instead wish to pursue this through the OIG.