Chaedrol GAO Protest Log 20240911: Ashton and Venergy

Ashton Marine Company - B-422634

You should not care.

Category: Compliance

Date: September 5, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422634

In this case, Ashton Marine Company protested its elimination from a competition after failing to provide a required resume for a key personnel position. The protester argued that the agency's elimination was based on a latent ambiguity regarding the resume requirement and claimed that the discussions held were not meaningful. GAO found that the solicitation was clear and unambiguous, specifically stating the need for a resume for the Stone Material Control Field Supervisor. Further, GAO determined the agency had conducted discussions in a manner that was equal and meaningful, addressing the proposal's deficiencies adequately. Ultimately, GAO denied the protest, affirming the agency's decision to exclude Ashton from the competition, thereby highlighting the importance of compliance with solicitation requirements in the contracting process.

Digest

1. Protest challenging agency's elimination of protester's proposal from competition is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably determined that the protester failed to provide a required resume for a key person.

2. Protest that agency conducted discussions in a manner that was not meaningful or equal is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably advised the protester of the agency's concerns with the protester's proposal and treated offerors in an even-handed manner.

Venergy Group, LLC - B-422708

You should not care.

Category: Timeliness

Date: September 10, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422708

In this case, Venergy Group, LLC protested its exclusion from a design-build competition conducted by the Department of the Army, asserting that the agency unreasonably evaluated its phase one proposal by overlooking its strengths and misinterpreting its past performance. However, GAO found that the protest was filed more than 10 days after Venergy received the agency’s evaluation, rendering it untimely. GAO emphasized strict adherence to timeliness rules as outlined in FAR subpart 36.3, which governs the design-build selection process.

Digest

1. In a procurement conducted under the two-phase design-build selection procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 36.3, protest challenging agency's evaluation of protester's phase one proposal is dismissed as untimely where the protest was filed more than 10 days after the protester received information that formed the basis of the protest.

2. Debriefing provided subsequent to phase one of the two-phase design-build procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 36.3 does not constitute a required debriefing under our general timeliness rules because the phase one procurement is not a procurement conducted on the basis of competitive proposals.