Salvadorini Consulting, LLC (W91YTZ24Q0025)

B-422376 May 16, 2024 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Salvadorini Consulting, LLC (Salvadorini), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Franklin, Tennessee, challenges the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. W91YTZ24Q0025, issued by the Department of the Army, for a Positron Emission Tomography or Computed Tomography (PET/CT) scanner by rental lease. The protester challenges the agency's allotted time to prepare and submit quotations as unreasonable. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Salvadorini Consulting, LLC File: B-422376 Date: May 16, 2024 Nicole D. Pottroff, Esq., Shane J. McCall, Esq., John Holtz, Esq., Gregory P. Weber, Esq., and Stephanie L. Ellis, Esq., Koprince McCall Pottroff LLC, for the protester. Andrew J. Smith, Esq., Lieutenant Colonel Michael Tregle, and Captain Paula Barr, Department of the Army, for the agency. Suresh S. Boodram, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest asserting that the agency did not provide sufficient time for offerors to submit quotations is denied where the time allotted was reasonable and in accordance with applicable procurement law and regulation. DECISION Salvadorini Consulting, LLC (Salvadorini), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Franklin, Tennessee, challenges the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. W91YTZ24Q0025, issued by the Department of the Army, for a Positron Emission Tomography or Computed Tomography (PET/CT) scanner by rental lease. The protester challenges the agency’s allotted time to prepare and submit quotations as unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On January 11, 2024, the Army published a pre-solicitation synopsis for its PET/CT scanner requirement on the SAM.gov website.[1] Agency Report (AR), Tab 5, SAM.gov Posting. The synopsis notified potential vendors of the Army’s intent to solicit the PET/CT scanner for the Womack Army Medical Center (WAMC) located at Fort Liberty, North Carolina, and included a copy of the anticipated performance work statement (PWS). Id. On January 12, the protester’s representative emailed the contracting officer asking when the Army would issue the RFQ described in the synopsis and begin to accept quotations. AR, Tab 5a, Email from Protester. On February 14, the agency issued the RFQ via SAM.gov as a fixed-price, small business set-aside utilizing the commercial procedures outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) parts 12 and 13. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 2. The RFQ contemplated a proposed base period of performance from March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2027, with two 12‑month option periods. AR, Tab 10, Combined Synopsis/Solicitation at 1-3. Award will be made on a lowest-price technically acceptable basis, including the consideration of two non-price factors: technical capability; and past performance. Id. at 48-49. The RFQ required vendors to submit their quotations by February 22. Id. at 1. The RFQ also notified potential vendors that questions about the RFQ could be submitted through February 16. Id. at 32. On February 20, the Army issued amendment 0001 to answer the questions it received before the deadline. AR, Tab 15, amend. 0001. On the same day, the protester requested an extension of the RFQ’s submission deadline. AR, Tab 14, Protester Request for Due Date Extension. The Army did not extend the deadline and Salvadorini filed its protest with our Office prior to the RFQ’s closing date. DISCUSSION Salvadorini argues that the RFQ does not provide sufficient time to prepare quotations.[2] Protest at 11; Comments at 4. Specifically, the protester contends that the 8-day period between issuance of the RFQ and the submission deadline afforded insufficient time to prepare quotations, especially considering the Army’s issuance of amendment 0001 two days before the due date for quotations.[3] Comments at 11. The Army counters that its advanced notice of its intent to solicit, the RFQ’s simplified requirements, and the number of quotations the Army ultimately received are all evidence that the Army’s timeline was reasonable. Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 6-8. For the reasons that follow, we find no basis on which to sustain the protest. Agencies generally must allow at least 30 days from the date of issuance of the solicitation for the receipt of offers or in this case quotations. FAR 5.203(c), 13.105(a). However, an agency may allow fewer than 30 days to respond to a solicitation where, as here, it is acquiring commercial items. Id.; FAR 12.205(c). When acquiring commercial items, the contracting officer should afford potential vendors a reasonable opportunity to respond considering the circumstances of the acquisition, such as the complexity, commerciality, availability, and urgency of the individual acquisition.