SDVOSBs Lose Aldevra Battle With VA, Says Federal Court

Posted on November 29, 2012 by Steven Koprince

As I briefly reported last night, in a crushing blow to service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has overturned the GAO’s Aldevra decisions.

Judge Nancy Firestone, ruling in Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. The United States, No. 12-173C (Nov. 27, 2012), held that the VA reasonably interpreted the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006 as not requiring consideration of a SDVOSB set-aside before the VA procures goods and services under the Federal Supply Schedule. For SDVOSBs, the Kingdomware Technologies ruling means that the VA’s much-ballyhooed “Veterans First” acquisition policy means little more than “Veterans First (If We Feel Like It).”

Breaking: Federal Court Sides With VA, Overturns Aldevra Decisions

Posted on November 28, 2012 by Steven Koprince

VetLikeMe, a publication advocating for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, is reporting tonight that the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has ruled in favor of the VA in a decision essentially overturning the GAO’s Aldevra line of cases.

The court’s decision, issued by Judge Nancy Firestone, has not yet appeared on the Court of Federal Claims’ website, but I have seen a copy of the ruling and can confirm VetLikeMe’s report.

In the decision, Judge Firestone holds that the VA need not consider a set-aside for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses before procuring supplies or services under the Federal Supply Schedule. Judge Firestone’s ruling essentially reverses more than a year’s worth of GAO decisions holding that the VA had violated the law by using FSS procedures without first considering SDVOSB set-asides.

More tomorrow on this crushing legal blow to SDVOSBs.

Federal Court Upholds Agency’s 40% Small Business Subcontracting Goal

Posted on November 28, 2012 by Steven Koprince

The United States Court of Federal Claims has denied a challenge to the Transportation Security Administration’s establishment of a 40% small business subcontracting goal–measured by total contract price, not total subcontracting dollars.

In Firstline Transportation Security v. The United States, No,. 12-601C (2012), Judge Thomas Wheeler rejected arguments that the TSA’s 40% small business subcontracting goal was unreasonable, contrary to the FAR, and improperly established a partial small business set-aside.

GAO: Agency Reasonably Required Resumes, Signed Employment Letters

Posted on November 27, 2012 by Steven Koprince

How easy would be for you to obtain resumes and signed letters of intent from your competitor’s employees?

If you answered “not very,” you’re not alone. A small business contractor, Maritime Institute Inc., recently protested the terms of a Navy solicitation, complaining that the solicitation unreasonably forced Maritime to obtain resumes and signed commitment letters from prospective employees, including any incumbent personnel Maritime intended to hire. According to the GAO, however, the Navy’s requirement was perfectly reasonable–notwithstanding any competitive advantage to the incumbent.

GAO: Agency Properly Upped Contractor’s Proposed Labor Rates

Posted on November 26, 2012 by Steven Koprince

Here’s hoping that you had a wonderful Thanksgiving, full of relaxation, family time, football and lots of food.

For one Arizona contractor, the holiday was a little less festive this year, after the contractor lost out on a Navy cost-reimbursement contract–in part because the Navy unilaterally upped some of the contractor’s proposed labor rates. The GAO found nothing wrong with the agency’s decision, holding that the Navy reasonably determined that the contractor’s proposed labor rates were unrealistically low.

DOJ Intervenes In False Claims Suit Over FAR Lobbying Restrictions

Posted on November 20, 2012 by Steven Koprince

In the latest indication that the Government is on the lookout for false and improper contractor certifications, the Department of Justice has intervened in a False Claims Act lawsuit against a Texas-based contractor involving the FAR lobbying restrictions.

According to a False Claims Act complaint filed by a whistleblower, Fluor Hanford Inc. and its parent company, Fluor Corporation, used federal funds for lobbying purposes, in violation of a FAR provision requiring Fluor to certify that it would not engage in lobbying with federal funds.

GAO: Agencies Have Broad Discretion On Conducting Discussions

Posted on November 19, 2012 by Steven Koprince

I don’t have a tag for “bad grounds for a GAO bid protest,” but if I did, challenging an agency’s decision not to conduct discussions would fall in that category–at least (as is typically the case), when the solicitation does not state that discussions will be conducted.

This issue comes up often enough in GAO bid protest decisions (with the same predictable result nearly every time) that it’s worth taking a quick look at one such recent case in which this particular issue arose.