Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical--Reconsideration

B-424123.3 Mar 17, 2026 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business of Virginia Beach, Virginia, requests that we reconsider our decision in Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical, B-424123.2, Jan. 28, 2026 (unpublished decision), in which we dismissed its protest of corrective action proposed by the Department of the Navy in response to an earlier protest by Rigid, which challenged the agency's award of a contract to Stronghold SOF Solutions, LLC, of DeFuniak Springs, Florida. The agency originally made the award under solicitation No. N6883625R0006, for the provision of a technical course of instruction relating to explosive ordnance disposal at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The protester requests that we reconsider our dismissal of its protest for failure to timely file comments within 10 days of the filing of the agency report because the protester contends that our headquarters building was closed on the due date for comments, and, thus, the due date for filing comments should have automatically extended to the next business day that GAO's headquarters reopened. We dismiss the request for reconsideration because it raises arguments the protester could have raised, but did not, during the original protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical--Reconsideration File: B-424123.3 Date: March 17, 2026 Anthony J. Mazzeo, Esq., Thomas Barrow, Esq., and Ryan Weber, Esq., Woods Rogers Vandeventer Black, PLC, for the protester. Richard B. Oliver, Esq., J. Matthew Carter, Esq., and Dinesh C. Dharmadasa, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Stronghold SOF Solutions, LLC, the intervenor. Courtney Hatcher, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Michael Willems, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Request for reconsideration is dismissed where the request for reconsideration relies on arguments that the protester could have raised, but did not raise, during the original protest. 2. A “snow day” on which the GAO headquarters building was closed is not an agency closure for the purposes of computing timeliness pursuant to 4 C.F.R. § 21.0(d) where the Electronic Protest Docketing System (EPDS) remained available. DECISION Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business of Virginia Beach, Virginia, requests that we reconsider our decision in Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical, B-424123.2, Jan. 28, 2026 (unpublished decision), in which we dismissed its protest of corrective action proposed by the Department of the Navy in response to an earlier protest by Rigid, which challenged the agency's award of a contract to Stronghold SOF Solutions, LLC, of DeFuniak Springs, Florida. The agency originally made the award under solicitation No. N6883625R0006, for the provision of a technical course of instruction relating to explosive ordnance disposal at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The protester requests that we reconsider our dismissal of its protest for failure to timely file comments within 10 days of the filing of the agency report because the protester contends that our headquarters building was closed on the due date for comments, and, thus, the due date for filing comments should have automatically extended to the next business day that GAO's headquarters reopened. We dismiss the request for reconsideration because it raises arguments the protester could have raised, but did not, during the original protest. By way of background, the agency filed its report responding to the original protest on January 16, 2026. Agency Resp. to Req. for Recon., exh. 1, EPDS docket at 6. The protester's comments, accordingly, were due ten days later, on January 26. 4 C.F.R. § 21.3(i). The intervenor filed its comments on January 26, but the protester did not file comments on that date. Agency Resp. to Req. for Recon., exh. 1, EPDS docket at 6. At approximately 9:30 a.m. on January 27, the agency filed a request for dismissal for failure to comment. Agency Resp. to Req. for Recon., exh. 1, EPDS docket at 6. The protester neither filed a substantive response to the agency's request for dismissal nor requested an opportunity to respond, and at 10:22 a.m. on January 28 we dismissed the protest. Rigid Security Group, Inc., d/b/a Rigid Tactical, B-424123.2, Jan. 28, 2026 (unpublished decision); see also Timberline Helicopters, supra (denying a request for reconsideration based on information learned by the protester after the submission of comments, but before the issuance of GAO's decision, explaining that the protester should have sought leave pursuant to 4 C.F.R.