ASG Solutions Corporation- dba American Systems Group (N4033925RS010)

B-424053 Jan 16, 2026 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights ASG Solutions Corporation d/b/a American Systems Group (ASG), a small business of San Diego, California, protests the award of a contract to WWC Global (WWC), a small business of Mashantucket, Connecticut, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. N4033925RS010, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Supply Systems Command, for individuals to perform administrative support services for the Navy overseas. The protester argues the agency failed to evaluate quotations consistent with the solicitation's best-value methodology and contends that the Navy failed to provide a required debriefing. We dismiss the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: ASG Solutions Corporation d/b/a American Systems Group File: B-424053 Date: January 16, 2026 Ritobrata Banerjee for the protester. Lori K. Stibb, Esq., and Sara L. Thompson, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Sarah T. Zaffina, Esq., and Heather Weiner, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest of an award made under a procurement using the simplified acquisition procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation part 13 filed more than 10 days after a post-award brief explanation is untimely where the procurement does not involve a required debriefing, and therefore, the debriefing exception to our timeliness rules does not apply. DECISION ASG Solutions Corporation d/b/a American Systems Group (ASG), a small business of San Diego, California, protests the award of a contract to WWC Global (WWC), a small business of Mashantucket, Connecticut, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. N4033925RS010, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Supply Systems Command, for individuals to perform administrative support services for the Navy overseas. The protester argues the agency failed to evaluate quotations consistent with the solicitation's best-value methodology and contends that the Navy failed to provide a required debriefing. We dismiss the protest. BACKGROUND On February 19, 2025, the agency issued the solicitation seeking quotations for two full‑time individuals to provide administrative support services for the Naval Supply Systems Command Fleet Logistics Center Bahrain (NAVSUP FLC Bahrain) to be performed at bases in the Kingdom of Bahrain. Protest, app. B, RFQ at 33, 69.[1] The agency issued the solicitation using the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures. Id. at 53. The RFQ was marked urgent, and quotations were due February 23, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. Bahrain local time. Id. at 33‑34, 53, 69. The RFQ required price quotations to be valid for 30 days after the deadline for receipt of quotations and performance was to begin March 30. Id. at 33-34, 53, 55, 69; see also id. at 66 (quoting answers to questions 27 and 28, “Boots on ground are required by 31 March 2025.”). ASG timely submitted its quotation to the Navy on February 23 with a price of $1,820,460. Protest, app. A, Email Exchange at 10, 13. On September 3, ASG emailed the Navy seeking information about when it would make an award decision. Id. at 10. On September 18, the Navy responded that its evaluation was complete and provided the following details of the award decision: Number of proposals received: Ten (10) Name of awardee: WWC Global Value of the Purchase Order: $1,460,947.20 Award was based on Trade off - Best Value Id. ASG requested a debriefing pursuant to FAR provision 15.506 on September 19, and the Navy responded that a “[d]ebrief is forthcoming” on September 21. Id. The Navy sent a second email on September 21 stating that FAR section 15.503(b)(2) applies to this procurement and all information that could be released under that provision had been previously provided in the September 18 email. Id. at 14. On September 22, ASG emailed the Navy asserting that it was entitled to a debriefing and that the procurement was not a simplified acquisition because the award exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold of $250,000. Id. at 13. After several emails between the Navy and the protester with each party reiterating their positions, on September 22, the Navy advised ASG to “[p]lease standby for response” and provided that the debriefing request had been elevated to the Office of General Counsel. Id. at 12. The parties continued to assert their positions in several more emails exchanged between September 30 and October 15. Id. at 11-12. On October 14, the Navy's counsel advised that the solicitation was conducted under FAR part 13 and that a brief explanation of its award decision in accordance with FAR sections 13.106-3(c) and (d) had been provided previously in its September 18 email. Id. at 11. On October 15, the protester sent its final email to the agency indicating that it would file a protest with our Office once the government shutdown had ended. Id.