Frontier Technologies, Inc. (W15QKN-21-R-0106)

B-420878 Aug 09, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Frontier Technologies, a small business of Long Beach, California, protests the rejection of its proposal under request for proposals (RFP) No. W15QKN-21-R-0106, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Materiel Command for production of M88 practice mine canisters. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably rejected the firm's proposal as having been submitted not in accordance with the solicitation's instructions. The protester submitted its protest to our Office after having first filed an agency-level protest with the Army Materiel Command. We dismiss the protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 calendar days after the protester had actual or constructive knowledge of adverse agency action on its agency-level protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Frontier Technologies File: B-420878 Date: August 9, 2022 Matthew D. Fischer, Esq., Fischer Law Office, for the protester. Debra J. Talley, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Heather Self, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging rejection of proposal is dismissed as untimely because it was filed with our Office more than 10 days after the protester’s agency-level protest was denied. DECISION Frontier Technologies, a small business of Long Beach, California, protests the rejection of its proposal under request for proposals (RFP) No. W15QKN-21-R-0106, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Materiel Command for production of M88 practice mine canisters. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably rejected the firm’s proposal as having been submitted not in accordance with the solicitation’s instructions. The protester submitted its protest to our Office after having first filed an agency-level protest with the Army Materiel Command. We dismiss the protest as untimely because it was filed more than 10 calendar days after the protester had actual or constructive knowledge of adverse agency action on its agency-level protest. BACKGROUND On January 26, 2022, utilizing the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, the agency issued the solicitation seeking proposals for the production, testing, packaging, and delivery of M88 practice mine canisters. Protest exh. 2, Protester Proposal with RFP at 8-9.[1] As relevant here, the solicitation set forth that “[p]roposals shall be submitted in electronic copies via the DOD SAFE website for secure file drop off.”[2] Protest exh. 2, Protester Proposal with RFP at 90. The solicitation further cautioned offerors to “[p]lease note that electronic e-mail proposal submissions will not be accepted.” Id. at 91. The solicitation established March 29, 2022, as the due date for receipt of proposals. Protest at 3; Protest exh. 6, Denial of Agency-Level Protest at 164. In preparing its proposal, Frontier encountered an instruction on the DOD SAFE website that provided: “DOD SAFE is NOT to be used for contract solicitation or proposal submission.” Protest at 2; exh. 1, DOD SAFE Website Instructions at 6. Based on this instruction, Frontier did not submit its proposal via the DOD SAFE website, and instead submitted its proposal via email to the agency on March 29, 2022. Protest at 2; exh. 2, Protester Proposal with RFP at 7. On March 30, the agency notified Frontier that the firm’s proposal “was not submitted appropriately, and did not follow the explicit instructions in the Solicitation,” and that the agency would not evaluate Frontier’s proposal. Protest exh. 4, Letter from Contracting Officer to Protester at 159. On April 6, Frontier, through its counsel, submitted an agency-level protest to the Army, challenging the rejection of the firm’s proposal. Protest exh. 5, Agency-Level Protest at 160. On June 21, the agency emailed its decision denying the agency-level protest to counsel for Frontier. Protest exh. 6, Denial of Agency-Level Protest at 163. At 7:44 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday July 8, Frontier filed this protest in our Electronic Protest Docketing System (EPDS). Docket No. 1. DISCUSSION Our Bid Protest Regulations contain strict rules for the timely submission of protests. Where a protest first has been filed with a contracting activity, any subsequent protest to our Office, to be considered timely, must be filed within 10 calendar days of “actual or constructive knowledge of initial adverse agency action.” 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(3). In this respect, our timeliness 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.