Courts, Boards, & GAO

Trending Now

Lost in Cyberspace: Late-Is-Late Rule Precudes Consideration of Protester’s Quarantined Proposal • Raytheon Loses Remand Fight Over Level 1 Cost Penalties, But Government Waived Right to CAS Penalties • Why Not Bidding—and Not Protesting Early—Doomed This Challenge to an Award • “I Could Have Competed” Won’t Cut It: COFC Requires Showing Contractor Could Perform Work if it Wants to Protest Solicitation Terms • Revolutionary FAR Overhaul Update: Rulemaking Phase Begins with the Issuance of Four Proposed Rules

Published on November 2, 2023 • Law

If the Solicitation Says Submit the Original, Fillable PDF, Don’t’ Even Think About Submitting a Non-Fillable Copy

monticello | Shutterstock

The solicitation required offerors to submit an original government-provided pdf. The protester submitted a completed non-fillable pdf. GAO said the agency rightly rejected the submission. The government-provided form was fillable. The solicitation required submission of the original form, so the protester’s submission should’ve been fillable.

New Generation Solution, LLC, GAO B-421941

PDF Requirement – The solicitation included a fillable pdf of a government form. The solicitation stated offerors had to complete and submit the original, fillable version of the form. The protester submitted a completed form, but it was a copy, and it was not fillable. The agency excluded the protester from the competition.
Original, Fillable Form – The protester argued the solicitation did not require the pdf to be submitted in its original, fillable form. GAO rejected the argument. The solicitation expressly stated the form “shall be sbumistted in the “original Government-provided . . . form.” The government-provided form was a fillable form.
Latent Ambiguity – The protester argued the instructions were ambiguous. The protester contended one could interpret the instructions as simply requiring offerors to complete the fillable form, but it did not require them to submit the fillable form. GAO was not persuaded. Again, the solicitation required offerors to submit the original, government-provided form. The government-provided form was fillable. So, the submission had to still be a fillable pdf.

The protester is represented by W. Brad English, Emily J. Chancey, Jon D. Levin, and Nicholas P. Greer of Maynard Nexsen, PC. The agency is represented by Russell W. Bottom and Daniel C. McIntosh of the Defense Information Systems Agency. GAO attorneys Michale P. Grogan and Evan D. Wesser participated in the decision.

--Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor

Get daily insights on bid protests, CDA claims, and contract litigation that shape the GovCon landscape with our Protests & Claims newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.