Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs
Sign in to follow this  
PD216ohio

RFQ due date extended after due date? Legitimate?

Recommended Posts

I am a bidder on a RFQ that was due at a certain time on a certain day.  A little over an hour after the due date, the bid was extended to allow site visits.  My concern is that, with the holiday week, my bid was the only one and after the due date passed the CO wanted to modify things.  Is this a valid extension of the due date (now extended for another 7 days) even though the site visit was scheduled for the very next day after the amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem at all.  Everything sounds fair.  At least, if the solicitation was an RFQ. 

If the solicitation was an IFB (you mentioned "my bid"), then the postponement might still be okay.  A contracting officer may postpone the bid opening even after the time scheduled for bid opening if he or she has reason to believe that the bids of an important segment of bidders have been delayed or if unanticipated events made it impractical to conduct of bid openings as scheduled.  You now have 7 additional days to sharpen your bid (you can submit a new bid and withdraw your previous one).

Everyone benefits when contracting officers conduct acquisitions to ensure maximum practicable competition while maintaining the integrity of the procurement system.

Speaking of integrity of the procurement system, how do you know that your bid was the only one submitted?  I hope you don't have an inside source who violated the Procurement Integrity Act in your favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, ji20874 said:

No problem at all.  Everything sounds fair.  At least, if the solicitation was an RFQ. 

If the solicitation was an IFB (you mentioned "my bid"), then the postponement might still be okay.  A contracting officer may postpone the bid opening even after the time scheduled for bid opening if he or she has reason to believe that the bids of an important segment of bidders have been delayed or if unanticipated events made it impractical to conduct of bid openings as scheduled.  You now have 7 additional days to sharpen your bid (you can submit a new bid and withdraw your previous one).

Everyone benefits when contracting officers conduct acquisitions to ensure maximum practicable competition while maintaining the integrity of the procurement system.

Speaking of integrity of the procurement system, how do you know that your bid was the only one submitted?  I hope you don't have an inside source who violated the Procurement Integrity Act in your favor.

I only suspect I may have been a sole bidder since this past week was mostly holiday time for most.  

I may have used the term "bid" incorrectly as it was actually a quotation or an offer actually.

This RFQ contained by incorporation 52-212-1 which changes the standards of an RFQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing in the provision at FAR 52.212-1 stops a contracting officer from amending the solicitation to extend the date and time set for receipt of quotes, even after the date and time originally set.  

Everything seems fair.  Best wishes!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ji20874 said:

Everything seems fair.  Best wishes!

As long as there is no preferred contractor and the change was made to accommodate that preferred contractor.  We all know that there are such things as "wired" procurements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think th

20 hours ago, PD216ohio said:

A little over an hour after the due date, the bid was extended to allow site visits. 

If a contractor did this and there was a government audit of the bidding process, I would not be surprised if there were questions about potential improprieties in the bidding process. For example, was the bid opened?Who saw the bid? Why was it suddenly discovered an hour after the closing that site visits were needed? Why wasn't that a requirement in the first place? In other words, specifically in detail, what happened and why at every stage of the process. There are many times where it looks bad but is entirely innocent or sloppy work by those involved. Not sure this helps, but I think you could ask the Government for a more complete explanation especially if your bid was opened.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quote is not an offer. A request for quotes (RFQ) is therefore less "stringent" than a request for proposals. A late quote is less of a big deal than a late proposal. When the government finds a quote it likes, the government will send an offer. 

However, both the government and contractors consistently misuse and confuse these distinctions.

17 minutes ago, Neil Roberts said:

Not sure this helps, but I think you could ask the Government

You can always ask...but need the government reply? Or provide a complete explanation? 

20 hours ago, PD216ohio said:

as it was actually a quotation or an offer actually.

Big difference. You need to get smart on this distinction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PepeTheFrog said:

A quote is not an offer. A request for quotes (RFQ) is therefore less "stringent" than a request for proposals. A late quote is less of a big deal than a late proposal. When the government finds a quote it likes, the government will send an offer.

I don't think this is true if the solicitation contained the unaltered text of FAR 52.212-1, as this provision includes the standard late offer rule. That's why I advocate tailoring the provision for SAP so the CO can accept late quotations if they are received before award is made and doing so would not unduly delay the acquisition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Don Mansfield said:
2 hours ago, PepeTheFrog said:

A quote is not an offer. A request for quotes (RFQ) is therefore less "stringent" than a request for proposals. A late quote is less of a big deal than a late proposal. When the government finds a quote it likes, the government will send an offer.

I don't think this is true if the solicitation contained the unaltered text of FAR 52.212-1, as this provision includes the standard late offer rule. That's why I advocate tailoring the provision for SAP so the CO can accept late quotations if they are received before award is made and doing so would not unduly delay the acquisition.

PepeTheFrog doesn't necessarily see a disconnect between the two...quotations, to pardon the pun. PepeTheFrog did not see the word "quote" or "quotation" anywhere in FAR 52.212-1.

PepeTheFrog's statement is general. Don Mansfield's statement is specific and more applicable to a solicitation that contains FAR 52.212-1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PepeTheFrog said:

You can always ask...but need the government reply? Or provide a complete explanation? 

I don't know if the buying office is required to respond. However, a contractor does not have to refrain from lodging a complaint with the DOD Inspector General or other Agency Inspector regarding potential fraud red flags and indicators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am with @Don Mansfield noting that 52.212-1 is specifically noted by the OP.  But does it change the the view of whether the agency action was appropriate?   Maybe yes maybe no....see below for a previous WIFCON discussion that might help.

@PepeTheFrog me thinks the quibble of use of offer rather quote in 52.212-1 is not held in the same view by GAO.  Also see below.

 

https://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/D15919

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 1:27 PM, PepeTheFrog said:

 

Big difference. You need to get smart on this distinction.

I say it is "either or" because the RFQ contained 52.212-1 which changes the quotation to be treated like an offer.... at least that has been successfully argued in past GAO decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, C Culham said:

I am with @Don Mansfield noting that 52.212-1 is specifically noted by the OP.  But does it change the the view of whether the agency action was appropriate?   Maybe yes maybe no....see below for a previous WIFCON discussion that might help.

@PepeTheFrog me thinks the quibble of use of offer rather quote in 52.212-1 is not held in the same view by GAO.  Also see below.

 

https://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/D15919

Than you for pointing out that previous conversation... it is very interesting.  I think the effective answer is that the CO in this case, regardless if 52.212-1 changes anything, can ammend the solicitation at any time before award for any "legitimate" reason they claim.

In this specific circumstance, 52.212-1 was incorporated (without modification) into the RFQ.  The offer was due on a certain date.  A little more than an hour after all offers were due, an amendment was issued to extend the due date by a week in order to arrange a site visit (which was set for the day after the original due date).  I would assume that the CO can justify the extension by claiming that a site visit was requested and would generate potentially more and better offers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the quotation marks around "legitimate."  Everyone benefits when contracting officers conduct acquisitions to ensure maximum practicable competition while maintaining the integrity of the procurement system.  You might win -- best wishes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the quotes.  But, as things go I put faith in COs for doing what is necessary to promote competition to the maximum extent practicable.  Yet I whole heartedly agree there is the 1% that do not and shape procurements to a lesser standard.  The OP has advice and thoughts and should chart his/her actions as felt best based on all the facts of which we just have a smiggin.

I hope we have provided adequate insight on all the angles for an informed decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...