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 | 3 min read | 05.28.26
Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 05.28.26
Texas Targets Big Tech With Wave of Suits and Investigations, Part of Nationwide Trend
Client Alert | 7 min read | 05.27.26
Colorado Hits Reset on AI Regulation: SB 26-189 Repeals and Reenacts the Colorado AI Act
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.27.26
Don’t Get Left in the Doghouse: The Federal Circuit’s Global K9 Case and the Duty to Intervene
