In its recent decision, the Court of Federal Claims decided whether and when an agency can cancel a FAR part 15 procurement and start from scratch. Agencies have historically been afforded extremely broad discretion in cancelling solicitations. But in this case, the court agreed with the protester that cancellation was wrongful. It also laid out the details of a proper versus improper solicitation cancellation quite nicely. Thus, this landmark decision provides crucial guidance on the subject for agencies and federal contractors alike.
Continue readingTag Archives: arbitrary and capricious
Agency’s Decision to Cancel FAR Part 8 Solicitations and Move the Work to Existing Multiple Award Contract Was Flawed, Says COFC
We already blogged on the COFC’s landmark Rule of Two decision in Tolliver Grp., Inc. v. United States. But the court’s two-part holding (in favor of the plaintiffs on both counts) was just too impactful for a single blog. Not only did the court fault the agency for failing to do a Rule of Two analysis before using an IDIQ, it also said that the agency failed to justify the decision to cancel the solicitations and switch contract vehicles under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) standard of review, which the court called a “highly deferential”–but not “toothless”–review.
Continue readingCourt Denies Protest of Procurement, Holds Dept. of Education Had Rational Basis
The Court of Federal Claims recently wrote that “[t]here is no such thing as a perfect procurement.” To anyone familiar with federal government contracts, this commentary states the obvious.
But springing from the Court’s observation is another important reality: “a flawed procurement is not necessarily an illegal one.”
Continue reading