The Contracting Education Academy

Contracting Academy Logo
You are here: Home / Archives for resolicitation

By

Contractor successfully uses GAO pre-award protest to modify solicitation

When the terms of a solicitation run contrary to the regulations, challenging the solicitation in a pre-award protest may provide contractors the chance to shift the tide in their favor before bids are submitted and an award is made.

In January 2020, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustained a pre-award bid protest brought by Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc. that challenged the terms of a General Services Administration (GSA) solicitation.   Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc., B-418141, 2020 WL 289546 (Jan. 16, 2020). Noble Supply argued the RFQ’s price evaluation methodology, as written, failed to provide for an evaluation of which offeror presented the best value and the lowest overall cost alternative, in violation of FAR part 8.

In the RFQ, GSA asked holders of GSA 51V Hardware Superstore Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts to bid on four blanket purchase agreements (BPAs) to provide hardware products and services to four military branches. For its price evaluation factor, the RFQ stated that GSA would evaluate price quotations “to ensure that offered pricing, to include flat rates and tiered volume discounts, is fair and reasonable.”  The RFQ then stated that GSA would not evaluate whether the award was the “lowest-priced technically acceptable” (LPTA), nor would it conduct a “best value tradeoff source selection methodology.” Thus, GSA would only evaluate the quotes for price reasonableness to determine whether prices were unreasonably high.

Noble Supply argued that this price methodology was contrary to 41 U.S.C. sections 152, 8.404(d) and 8.405-3(a), which require GSA to award BPAs to the awardee that provides the “best value and results in the lowest overall cost alternative.”  GAO agreed, explaining that “consideration of the lowest cost is an imperative when using the FSS” and therefore GSA is required to “reach a determination regarding which FSS vendor meets the agency’s needs at the lowest overall cost.” Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc., B-418141, 2020 WL 289546, at *6 (Jan. 16, 2020).

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/Article/891604

By

A high-profile OTA program goes off the rails

It had to happen at some point.  A high-profile, big-ticket Army program using an other transaction authority (OTA) agreement has turned into a fiasco.
One prototype of the Army SMET (squad multipurpose equipment transport) concept.

In December, the Army Contracting Command announced it was canceling and re-soliciting a contract issued in October to manufacture hundreds of robotic mules. This is bad news.

For critics of the Army’s acquisition system, it’s another example of the service’s poor record over the last 20 to 30 years of developing and fielding new weapon systems. While Army leadership say they are going to speed procurement of badly needed technology to take on “great powers” — this is a black mark and will certainly get the attention of Congress.

And the same goes for proponents of other transaction authority agreements — touted as a way to put new technology into the hands of warfighters faster by forgoing the traditional acquisition system.

The program in question is the squad multipurpose equipment transport, or SMET, the Army’s answer to helping dismounted troops lighten their loads. This so-called robotic mule has been on the service’s wish list dating back to the Future Combat Systems program, which was canceled in 2009.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2020/2/4/a-high-profile-ota-program-goes-off-the-rails

By

Pentagon will relaunch $475 million cyber effort this fall

Shortly after cancelling its search for bids on a five-year outsourcing contract, U.S. Cyber Command said a retooled version will be out by October.

US Cyber CommandAfter abandoning last week a $475 million job posting for cyberattack and network defense experts, the Pentagon now says a retooled solicitation that takes into account private sector questions will be out by Oct. 1.

“Given significant interest along with technical and clarification questions from industry, U.S. Cyber Command is reassessing and amending the [request for proposals] to give industry better fidelity into cyber requirements,” a Cyber Command official told Nextgov on May 28th.

The original solicitation, released April 30, was itself a revised version of a December 2014 draft request for proposals. The draft and final contracts both strove to reconcile the command’s needs with cyber market realities.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2015/05/pentagon-will-relaunch-475-million-cyber-effort-fall/11406:

By

Army issues revised RFP for ground combat vehicle

The Army on Tuesday asked industry to submit proposals for developing a new infantry fighting vehicle that could be used across the full spectrum of battlefield operations, from counterinsurgency to ground combat.

The request for proposals follows the August cancellation of a similar solicitation after Defense Department acquisition officials questioned the service’s requirements and strategy for buying a new ground combat vehicle. Army leaders have struggled with the best way to fill the service’s need for tactical vehicles after Defense Secretary Robert Gates scuttled that portion of the wide-ranging Future Combat Systems program last year.

“The Army and [Defense acquisition officials] have worked through this and are firmly committed to getting this kicked off,” Col. Andrew DiMarco, ground combat vehicle project manager, said in a conference call with reporters.

Michael Smith, the official in charge of developing concepts and requirements for the vehicle, said the Army is looking for a vehicle that can be adapted “on the fly” to changing battlefield requirements and threats.

The infantry fighting vehicle must be able to carry nine soldiers and their gear, and it must have a modular armor system that can be tailored to specific situations, according to Smith.

The technical development phase will have full and open competition, DiMarco said, adding the Army could select up to three contractors for the initial award. To control costs, the Army has set a spending ceiling of $450 million for the development phase. Per unit manufacturing costs are to be between $9 million and $10.5 million with a life-cycle cost target of $200 per operating hour.

Proposals are due Jan. 21, 2011, and the Army expects to announce awards in April, said DiMarco.

The Army eventually plans to buy about 1,800 vehicles, he said.

– By Katherine McIntire Peters – GovExec.com –  November 30, 2010

Contracting Academy Logo
75 Fifth Street, NW, Suite 300
Atlanta, GA 30308
info@ContractingAcademy.gatech.edu
Phone: 404-894-6109
Fax: 404-410-6885

RSS Twitter