Awardees in Multiple-Award Procurements Can Challenge Award Decisions to Fellow Awardees
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.16.16
In Nat’l Air Cargo, Inc. v. U.S. (Apr. 28, 2016), the CFC concluded that awardees in a procurement contemplating the award of multiple IDIQ contracts are interested parties with standing to challenge the validity of the awards to other contract awardees in the procurement. In a significant departure from GAO's stance of the issue, the court held that, even when all task order work under the IDIQ is to be competed at a later date, each awardee suffers a non-trivial injury from the improper addition to the original pool of awardees because the size of the pool has a material impact on the likelihood of winning future task order work.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26
Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.29.26
What University Licensors Should Learn From TexasLDPC v. Broadcom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
