The Morganti Group, Inc. (W912ER-22-R-0007)

B-420750.2 Dec 19, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The Morganti Group, Inc., of Danbury Connecticut, protests the award of a contract to American International Contractors, Inc. (AICI), of McLean, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912ER-22-R-0007, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, for the construction of a munitions storage area in Jordan. The protester contends that the agency improperly failed to evaluate its proposal. It also contends the agency engaged in disparate treatment. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: The Morganti Group, Inc. File: B-420750.2 Date: December 19, 2022 Jason P. Matechak, Esq., and Jill K. McDowell, Esq., Impresa Legal Group, for the protester. Scott M. Heimberg, Esq., Thomas P. McLish, Esq., and Samantha J. Block, Esq., Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, for American International Contractors, Inc., the intervenor. Megan O. Jorns, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Jacob M. Talcott, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that agency improperly failed to evaluate protester’s proposal is denied where the protester failed to submit its proposal in accordance with the terms of the solicitation, and its proposal was automatically and irretrievably deleted by the agency’s system. 2. Protest that agency engaged in disparate treatment is denied where agency treated similarly situated offerors in an equal manner. DECISION The Morganti Group, Inc., of Danbury Connecticut, protests the award of a contract to American International Contractors, Inc. (AICI), of McLean, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912ER-22-R-0007, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, for the construction of a munitions storage area in Jordan. The protester contends that the agency improperly failed to evaluate its proposal. It also contends the agency engaged in disparate treatment. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on October 22, 2021, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15. Agency Report (AR), Tab 6, RFP at 2, 12. The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract for a period of 870 days. Id. at 60. The due date for proposals, as amended, was March 8, 2022.[1] COS at 1. The solicitation provided for the submission of proposals in three volumes: technical, price, and responsibility determination. RFP at 13. Offerors were required to submit their proposals electronically through the Department of Defense’s Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) site. [2] RFP at 17. To submit a proposal through SAFE, an offeror first needed to email the contracting officer and contract specialist at least four days before the due date for proposals to request a SAFE code. Id. The agency explains that it would then send the offeror an email with a link that contained a unique twelve-character code that directed them to the SAFE site. MOL at 3. Once on the SAFE site, the offeror would enter the code provided by the agency; SAFE would then open a drop-off form wherein the offeror would upload its file, and enter the names and emails of the intended agency recipients.[3] Id. After the submission, SAFE would notify the listed agency recipients, that a file had been dropped off and provide them a link, claim ID, and passcode that granted them access to view and download the electronic file with the proposal. Id. at 3‑4. The agency explains that SAFE, by default, would notify the offeror when the agency had opened and downloaded its proposal. Id. After seven days, regardless of whether the agency had opened and downloaded the firm’s proposal, the agency represents that SAFE would automatically and irretrievably delete the file. Id. at 3. The agency received sixteen emails requesting SAFE codes, including one from Morganti. COS at 2; see AR, Tab 74, Morganti Email Evidencing Request for SAFE Code at 7. The agency responded to Morganti’s request and provided it with the necessary link and code to upload the firm’s proposal to the SAFE site. AR, Tab 74, Morganti Email Evidencing Request for SAFE Code at 22. According to Morganti, it then submitted its proposal in accordance with the solicitation instructions, and received an automated confirmation notice from SAFE that its “[d]rop-off . . . [had been] successfully sent to the recipient.”[4] Protest, exh. C‑4, SAFE Drop-Off Confirmation at 2. The recipient’s email address listed in this automated notice, however, was misspelled.[5] See id.; RFP at 17.