Category Archives: Bid Protest

Subscribe to Bid Protest RSS Feed

GAO Dismisses Protest Alleging Noncompliance with E-Verify Requirements

In Ashland Sales & Service Co., B-408969 (Nov. 1, 2013), the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) dismissed a protest by Ashland Sales & Service Co. (“Ashland”) alleging that a contract for lightweight jackets was improperly awarded to Creighton AB, Inc. (“Creighton”) where Creighton was not enrolled in the employment eligibility verification (“E-Verify”) system at the time … Continue Reading

Free(er?) Trade – US, EU and Canada Quibble Over Market Access and Domestic Preferences

The US is generally pretty keen on international free trade agreements. And why shouldn’t it be? After all, free trade agreements have the ability to open up foreign markets to US goods and services, allowing new and expanding opportunities for US companies. But “free trade” does not always mean “free trade” – it usually means … Continue Reading

What Does 2013 Have In Store for Government Contractors and Their Lawyers?

By Louis Victorino and Jonathan Aronie (originally published in the San Diego Business Journal) It has been noted, the more things change, the more they stay the same. In the world of Government Contracts Law, however, the more things change, the more the phone rings. And while we’re only a few weeks into 2013, the … Continue Reading

Just Give Me The Facts: GAO Overturns Army Disqualification Of Awardee

By: Anne B. Perry On November 21, 2011, GAO issued a rather surprising decision in which it overturned an agency’s determination that an appearance of impropriety justified the termination of a contract award. Specifically, in VSE Corp., B-404833, November 21, 2011, GAO rejected the Contracting Officer’s determination that VSE’s use of the former government Deputy Project … Continue Reading

A New Twist On Establishing Interested Party Status At The GAO

By: Townsend Bourne In a bid protest decision regarding the propriety of agency corrective action, GAO recently carved out a new exception to its general rule that those who do not participate in a protest that engenders corrective action are not interested parties to challenge the corrective action. In North Wind, Inc.; Earth Resources Technology, Inc., … Continue Reading

Task And Delivery Order Protests: Taking Aim At A Moving Target

By Marko W. Kipa The saga began with the passage of the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. While the Act contained a general prohibition barring bid protests of task and delivery order awards (excluding challenges to scope, period, or maximum value), it granted the GAO exclusive jurisdiction over bid protests of civilian and defense agency … Continue Reading

Protesting at ODRA?: Learning the Lay of the Land

By Marko W. Kipa & Ryan E. Roberts Your company submitted a proposal to the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) to provide widgets and related services. The opportunity had corporate visibility and was critical to your sector’s bottom line. After several agonizing months of waiting for an award decision, you learn that the FAA made an award to … Continue Reading

“First Impression” Ruling: Court May Review the Rationality of Emails Sent By GAO Attorneys

By Townsend L. Bourne In Systems Application & Technologies, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-280C (Fed. Cl. August 25, 2011), the Court of Federal Claims addressed an “issue of first impression” – whether the court can review an email message from a Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) attorney in the same way that it reviews a … Continue Reading

The GAO Holds It Possesses Jurisdiction Over Bid Protests of Civilian Agency Task and Delivery Order Awards

By Marko W. Kipa Many believed that the Government Accountability Office’s (“GAO’s”) jurisdiction over bid protests of civilian agency task and delivery order awards valued at over $10 million expired on May 27, 2011. This belief was based on the fact that certain broadened jurisdiction over civilian agency task and delivery order protests granted by the … Continue Reading

Making Amends: Countdown To May 27, 2011

By Marko W. Kipa Over the past three years, government contractors have been able to pursue bid protests at the Government Accountability Office (the “GAO”) challenging awards of defense and civilian task and delivery orders valued at over $10 million. This expanded jurisdiction, however, is set to expire on May 27, 2011. Congress appeared to have addressed … Continue Reading

Has The Sun Set On GAO’s Civilian Contract Task And Delivery Order Bid Protest Jurisdiction?

By Marko W. Kipa With the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (the “2008 Act”), Congress expanded the GAO’s jurisdiction to include bid protests in connection with civilian and defense contract task and delivery orders valued at over $10 million. See Section 843 of the 2008 Act, Pub. L. No. 110-181. Congress also … Continue Reading

Let Bygones Be Bygones – Except When It Comes To “Out of Scope” Modifications

By Marko W. Kipa After an unsuccessful bid protest, many contractors assume that their chance at getting a piece of the action has passed. They assume that they have exhausted their remedies and that all of the spoils inevitably will go to the victor. They let bygones be bygones and move-on to the next capture opportunity and … Continue Reading

Identifying Viable Pre-Award Bid Protest Allegations At The GAO

By Keith R. Szeliga, Marko W. Kipa and Jessica M. Madon The Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) is authorized to hear pre-award and post-award bid protest cases. While protests often focus on post-award challenges to an agency’s evaluation, there are many meritorious protest grounds that must be raised, if at all, prior to the closing date for … Continue Reading

The Dangers Of Courtship: Organizational Conflicts Of Interest Arising From Contemplated Corporate Transactions

By Keith R. Szeliga As the economy begins to recover, the number of corporate transactions between Government contractors no doubt will increase. If your company is positioned as a potential acquirer or a potential target, you should be aware of a recent Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) decision holding that entering into negotiations for a corporate transaction can … Continue Reading

Final Rule Issued on Enhanced Competition for Task and Delivery Order Contracts

By Marko W. Kipa On March 19, 2009, the FAR Councils issued a final rule providing for enhanced competition for task and delivery order contracts. See 75 Fed. Reg. 13416 (Mar. 19, 2009). The final rule was the culmination of a rulemaking process that surfaced in Section 843 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008, Pub. L. … Continue Reading

COFC Endorses CDA Claim For Breach Of “Fair Opportunity To Be Considered”

The Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act’s bid protest bar precluded contractors from challenging the award of a task or delivery order, subject to several limited exceptions — i.e., if the task or delivery order increased the scope, period or maximum value of the underlying IDIQ contract. Recent amendments to the Act expanded GAO’s bid protest jurisdiction to … Continue Reading

Not-So Meaningful Discussions: The Hidden Peril of a “Good” Proposal

As the closing time for receipt of proposals approaches, controlled chaos starts to take over. For one reason or another, changes may be made to your Company’s proposal that prevent it from putting its best foot forward. You are certain that the proposal meets the Solicitation requirements, but you also believe that one section of the proposal … Continue Reading

GAO Sides with Foreign Military Sales Program Contractors in Dispute Over Protest Costs

Contractors engaged in procurements under the Foreign Military Sales ("FMS") program can breathe a little easier after a Government Accountability Office ("GAO") ruling on November 5, 2009, in which the GAO denied the U.S. Army Material Command’s ("Army’s") assertion that a contractor is not entitled to reimbursement for its protest costs associated with an FMS … Continue Reading

GAO Rejects “Aggregate” Valuation Method for Determining Qualification Under the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act

In Caddell Constr. Co., Inc., B-401596, et al, Sept. 21, 2009, the GAO sustained a protest against the pre-qualification of a vendor on the grounds that the Department of State’s (DOS) determination that the vendor satisfied the qualification requirements of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (Security Act) was unreasonable. The GAO recommended … Continue Reading
LexBlog