RiverNorth, Inc. (12SAD225Q0001)

B-423274 Apr 11, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights FI Consulting, Inc. (FIC), a small business of Arlington, Virginia, protests the elimination of its quotation under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 12SAD225Q0001, issued by the Department of Agriculture (USDA) for program support to various USDA missions, including farm production and conservation. The protester argues that the agency improperly eliminated its quotation based on ambiguous solicitation formatting instructions and in the alternative, the agency should have waived the protester's failure to follow solicitation instructions as a minor informality. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. View Decision Decision Matter of: FI Consulting, Inc. File: B-423274 Date: April 11, 2025 Devon E. Hewitt, Esq., and Matthew L. Nicholson, Esq., Potomac Law Group, PLLC, for the protester. Adam Humphries, Esq., Department of Agriculture, for the agency. Janis R. Millete, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest alleging that the solicitation contained a latent ambiguity is denied where the protester’s interpretation of the relevant solicitation language is not reasonable. 2. Protest alleging that the agency should have waived the protester’s quotation error as a minor informality is dismissed where the agency was not required to waive minor informalities under Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 8.4. DECISION FI Consulting, Inc. (FIC), a small business of Arlington, Virginia, protests the elimination of its quotation under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 12SAD225Q0001, issued by the Department of Agriculture (USDA) for program support to various USDA missions, including farm production and conservation. The protester argues that the agency improperly eliminated its quotation based on ambiguous solicitation formatting instructions and in the alternative, the agency should have waived the protester’s failure to follow solicitation instructions as a minor informality. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. BACKGROUND On October 15, 2024, USDA issued the RFQ through the General Services Administration’s electronic system, eBuy, as a small business set-aside pursuant to the federal supply schedule procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4. Agency Report (AR), Edh. 4.1, RFQ at 47-48; AR, Exh. 3, Determination of Compliance Review at 1.[1] The solicitation contemplated the establishment of a multiple award, blanket purchase agreement (BPA) for a 5-year period of performance. AR, Exh. 6.1, RFQ amend. 0002 at 1; RFQ at 48. The RFQ advised that USDA would establish up to seven BPAs with award to be made on a best-value tradeoff basis. RFQ at 63. The following factors would be used to evaluate quotations: past performance, technical approach, and price. Id. Past performance was to be rated acceptable or unacceptable; a vendor had to receive an acceptable rating under this factor to be eligible for award. Id. The technical approach factor had two subfactors, project and portfolio management, and organizational conflicts of interest. Id. at 65. Each subfactor would receive a combined technical and risk rating. Id. The solicitation explained that these two subfactors were of equal importance, and when combined were more important than price. Id. at 63. Relevant here, under the general instructions for quotations, the RFQ provided: The [vendor]’s quot[ation] represents the quality of the performance the Government can expect in the performance of work under this BPA. Therefore, the [vendor]’s ability to present a quality quot[ation], free of spelling and grammatical errors is a reflection of the quality of work the Government will expect from awardees. The [vendor]’s ability to follow the instructions contained herein is a demonstration of the [vendor]’s ability to follow instructions in general, which is paramount to acceptable performance. The [vendor]’s attention to detail is important to the Government as a significant amount of work under the attached PWS [performance work statement] will require the [vendor] to follow detailed instructions, including quality control. If a[] [vendor]’s quot[ation] has errors attributed to not following the directions contained herein, the [vendor]’s quot[ation] shall be ineligible for award. Id. at 47. The RFQ included specific instructions regarding quotation formatting. As relevant to this protest, the solicitation stated that in the quotations, “[i]llustrations may be placed as an imbedded picture, as long as the picture does not contain text.” Id. at 51. The RFQ also invited potential vendors to ask questions.