I posted an RFQ on GSA Ebuy. However, one vendor decided to send the offer through email instead of through the GSA Ebuy system like every other vendor.

I didn't think I had to actually specify all offers have to come through GSA Ebuy because I thought it would be obvious.

 

Can I (or do I have to) exclude this offer that didn't follow the correct procedures to send the offer via GSA Ebuy?

This is a question for GSA.  I doubt anyone here is sufficiently knowledgable in eBuy and knows what conditions are for vendor responses without doing research.  

15 hours ago, NewbieFed said:

I posted an RFQ on GSA Ebuy. However, one vendor decided to send the offer through email instead of through the GSA Ebuy system like every other vendor.

I didn't think I had to actually specify all offers have to come through GSA Ebuy because I thought it would be obvious.

 

Can I (or do I have to) exclude this offer that didn't follow the correct procedures to send the offer via GSA Ebuy?

A different view.   

 I would seek legal counsel via your agency.   Take a look at FAR 8.405-1.  In concert with the FAR see the reference below which is a link to a document that may assist in answering your own question. 

Based on the thin information provided and my read of FAR 8.405-1 and the link provided I do wonder what the harm would be in considering the quote if the contractor submitting the quote is in fact holder of a GSA FSS contract for the specific item or service that you are seeking?   The basis for my thought is that your question suggests the value of your need is above the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and FAR 8.405-1(d)(4) and the fact that the whole of FAR 8.405-1(d) only discusses posting not submission and most importantly in my view you suggest that you did not state that only quotes via E-Buy would be considered.   It seems the "fairly" standard of FAR 8.405-1(d)(4) comes into play.  

https://www.gsaadvantage.gov/images/products/elib/pdf_files/bguide.pdf

Carl, my initial thoughts were very similar.   But I don’t know what GSA instructs contractors to do along with associated rules when using eBuy.  So that’s when I decided to refer Newbie to GSA.

2 minutes ago, formerfed said:

Carl, my initial thoughts were very similar.   But I don’t know what GSA instructs contractors to do along with associated rules when using eBuy.  So that’s when I decided to refer Newbie to GSA.

I might understand GSA to an extent but it seems that the FAR wording along with the linked GSA document I provided suggests some discretion by the buying agency.  I then concluded that it is what the EBuy solicitation states.  Only EBuy responses will be considered then so be it.  But, if not so stated then it seems allowing the quote to be considered is appropriate.   Kind of follows the general premise applied to any solicitation, what is responsive to the rules established by the solicitation.

Seems like it would be wise to see if the GSA contracts contain any conditions requiring submission of quotes through the EBuy System.

NewbieFed appears to have assumed that it was an “obvious” requirement that Newbie didn’t have to specify.

Apparently, the RFQ contained an email address for some reason. If it didn’t, how is it appropriate to send a quote via email? If it did, was there a stated purpose for the email address?

If the EBuy route is not an inherent requirement, it’s a lesson learned to specify how to submit quotes.

Seems like a simple solution here. 

@NewbieFed , please let us know how this worked out.

Of course, if the quote in question isn’t otherwise the winner, it wouldnt be an issue for award this time. Thanks.

2 hours ago, joel hoffman said:

If the EBuy route is not an inherent requirement, it’s a lesson learned to specify how to submit quotes.

My comments in this thread are in part based on this quote from the linked document I provided.

"Since eBuy is a paperless electronic quote system, suggest that when posting RFQs that you do not also require vendors to submit hardcopy quotes (via mail or e-mail)."

I admittedly didnot research GSA FSS contract clauses for an absolute regarding eBuy, I took the GSA document at face value that there is discretion, vis a vis "suggest".

@C Culham, yep probably so. Likely a lesson learned not to assume that submission requirements are totally specified in the EBuy system. Also to read all the GSA instructions…

This is probably a rhetorical question. But if you are using anther agency’s contract, wouldn’t it be appropriate to CALL or otherwise contact THEM first for an after the fact question about using their contract? Like asking “what happens if one of the schedule holders emailed their quote instead of submitting it through the EBuy system?”  

 

30 minutes ago, joel hoffman said:

This is probably a rhetorical question. But if you are using anther agency’s contract, wouldn’t it be appropriate to CALL or otherwise contact THEM first for an after the fact question about using their contract? Like asking “what happens if one of the schedule holders emailed their quote instead of submitting it through the EBuy system?”  

 

@formerfed had the same suggestion.  I countered of sorts.  To further my thought how about this?  If one is going to use another's IDIQ type contract how about grabbing that parent contract and reading it before using?  

PS - The continued discussion drove me to GSA eLibrary for a read of contract clauses placed in GSA FSS contracts.  No reference to eBuy that I could find.  Still sticking with discretion and the rules stated in the RFQ.

I typed up a similar thought then deleted it. Thx for the thought. 

5 hours ago, joel hoffman said:

This is probably a rhetorical question. But if you are using anther agency’s contract, wouldn’t it be appropriate to CALL or otherwise contact THEM first for an after the fact question about using their contract? Like asking “what happens if one of the schedule holders emailed their quote instead of submitting it through the EBuy system?”  

I was part of a task force studying GWACS and MACS.  One of the surprising findings from interviewing program managers responsible for these contracts is there are so many instances of improper agency ordering use.  That’s why those contracts contain extensive instructions for ordering agency use.  I know a couple of the largest contracts require agency program management and contracting personnel take online training before they become authorized to use them.

In this specific case Newbie admitted upfront he wanted the question moved to the Beginners section.  That implies he doesn’t have much experience of knowledge.  That also assumes he likely doesn’t know enough to do extensive research to even ask the right questions.  Asking GSA for their help likely would get a quick and proper answer. GSA is staffed with people to promptly answer questions and help.

I started to respond with all the fairly obvious items like quotes aren’t binding, the solicitation didn’t specify rules, procedures say you must accept responses from contractors even if you didn’t solicit, and so forth.  But then I realized I didn’t know what rules GSA established - those might be in some agreement with GSA contract holders when signing up to use eBuy.  So asking GSA the question upfront seems best.  If Newbie had doubts with the response, he could verify with his agency.  I’m pretty certain he would get a very quick, if not immediate answer to his question from GSA.  The alternative is spending a long time researching on his own including asking his legal office (and so many legal offices across the government seem to need a lot of background and written questions before responding).

I should add this is my personnel perspective and recommendation.  Lots of ways exist to address this situation.  I just gravitate towards what I feel is the most efficient and responsive within the time frames.
 

 

On 9/3/2024 at 3:14 PM, NewbieFed said:

Can I (or do I have to) exclude this offer that didn't follow the correct procedures to send the offer via GSA Ebuy?

Just out of curiosity, why are you so keen on eliminating an offer based on an administrative technicality?