B-297053.4, Jun 7, 2006
Haworth, Inc. protests the award of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) to Herman Miller, Inc. under its Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. RFQ78965, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) to acquire furniture for a new federal office building in San Francisco, California. Haworth asserts that the agency improperly rejected its quotation as unacceptable.
We deny the protest.
B-297053.4, Haworth Inc., June 7, 2006
1. Protest that agency unreasonably rejected protester's quotation for failing to timely include all quoted items under its Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract is denied where agency advised firms that it required all quoted items to be included under FSS contract by a specific date, and protester failed to ensure that all of its quoted items were in fact included under its FSS contract by that date.
2. Protest assertion raised initially in protester's comments is dismissed as untimely where record shows that protester had all necessary information to raise argument at time initial protest was filed.
Haworth, Inc. protests the award of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) to Herman Miller, Inc. under its Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. RFQ78965, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) to acquire furniture for a new federal office building in San Francisco, California.
The agency issued the RFQ in April 2005, soliciting quotations to provide the furniture requirements of the tenant organizations that are to occupy the new
Thereafter, the agency issued a series of amendments to the RFQ. Amendment No. 0004 established a revised deadline for having quoted furniture items included under vendors' FSS contracts. After receiving new quotations, the agency determined that the vendors still did not have all of their products included under their respective FSS contracts. Accordingly, GSA issued amendment No. 0008, which provided as follows:
All products offered must be on GSA schedule contract no later than
February 8, 2006. Note, it is the contractor's full responsibility to ensure that all products in their offer are entirely on the FSS Schedule by the referenced date. The Government will consider an offeror's failure to do so as non-responsive and may be grounds for default.
Agency Report (AR), exh. 17.
We conclude that the agency's actions were reasonable. The RFQ, in this third iteration of the acquisition, established an unequivocal deadline--February 8--for vendors to have all of their quoted items included under their FSS contracts. The RFQ was equally clear in stating that it was the vendors' responsibility to ensure that this requirement was met, and that the consequences of a failure to do so would be that the agency would find the quotation nonresponsive (i.e., unacceptable). Moreover, the agency repeatedly advised Haworth, both before and after the issuance of amendment No. 0008, of its continuing concern that the firm had not met the requirement.
Protest grounds such as these must be raised no later than 10 days after the information on which they are based was known or should have been known. Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. sect. 21.2(a)(2) (2006). Further, where, after filing a timely protest, the protester later supplements it with new protest grounds, the later-raised grounds must independently satisfy our timeliness requirements. L-3 Sys. Co. Wescam Sonoma, Inc., B-297323,
The protest is denied.
Anthony H. Gamboa
 The agency advised
 In its initial letter of protest,
To the extent