United States: March 2017 Protest Roundup

Our March bid protest round-up brings you disparate treatment, undocumented agency rationales, the duty of candor to courts, the unusual timeliness rules for protests of Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCIs), and (once again) the Late Is Late rule.

  1. CSR, Inc., B-413973; B-413973.2, Jan. 13, 2017:  GAO affords agencies great deference in their value judgments as to the comparative merits of different offerors' proposals.  It ordinarily is extremely difficult to convince GAO that your rating for a particular factor should have been excellent rather than good, or that your technical approach was actually better than the awardee's, despite an agency finding to the contrary.  The protest of CSR, Inc., however, demonstrates two arguments that – when backed up by the record – can overcome that deference: disparate treatment and insufficient Under the Past Performance factor, the protester argued that the agency ignored positive past performance information not expressly cited in the proposal.  The agency countered that it considered only the most recent evaluation of the past performance references identified in the protester's proposal.  Although GAO permits agencies reasonably to limit their past performance review, the record revealed that, for the awardee, the agency did consider past performance information not referenced in the awardee's proposal.  Because this disparate treatment of the offerors reasonably could have resulted in prejudice to the protester, the GAO sustained this ground of the protest.  CSR also objected to the Source Selection Authority's (SSA) identification of Corporate Experience – for which the protester and awardee received the same rating and similar strengths – as a technical discriminator justifying award to a higher priced offeror.  Nothing in the record, however, substantiated any real difference between the awardee's and protester's Corporate Experience.  Although SSAs are not bound to the findings of evaluators, an SSA must explain and document any difference between the documented evaluation and the SSA's best value tradeoff analysis, especially when that divergence is a basis of the award decision.  Because the SSA failed to explain why she thought the awardee's Corporate Experience was meaningfully superior to the protester's, GAO sustained the protest on this ground, as well, and recommended that the agency re-evaluate proposals.

Takeaway:  If an agency engages in disparate treatment or fails to document the basis for its procurement choices, a protester may be able to overcome the deference ordinarily accorded to agency evaluations and tradeoff decisions.

  1. Harmonia Holdings Grp., LLC, B-413464; B-413464.2, Nov. 4, 2016:  In the case above, the agency failed to document the basis of a key finding in the best value tradeoff analysis.  In Harmonia, the agency apparently did not conduct one at all.  In an ordinary best value procurement, when no single offeror is both lowest priced and highest rated, the SSA must conduct a best value analysis in accordance with the procurement's announced evaluation scheme.  That analysis, which must be documented, includes a tradeoff between cost/price and merit under the non-cost/price evaluation factors.  In Harmonia, the agency received five quotations.  The agency made award to the offeror that had the highest technical score, but also the highest price.  The protester, which had the second highest technical score and the second lowest price, protested.  The record contained only a comparison of the offerors' relative technical scores, but no price/technical comparison between the awardee and any other offeror, and no explanation for why the awardee's technical superiority was worth the $3 million price premium over the protester's quote.  Because the record did not establish that the agency conducted any best value tradeoff at all, GAO sustained the protest.

Takeaway:  Agencies are required to document their best value analyses, including the rationale for any cost/price-technical tradeoffs, and failure to do so is a basis for sustaining a protest.

  1. Level 3 Communications, LLC v. United States, No. 16-829 (Fed. Cl. March 16, 2017):  In a follow-up to a December 2016 opinion (Level 3 Communications, LLC, v. United States, 129 Fed. Cl. 487 (2016)), the Court of Federal Claims recently issued a ruling on counsel's duty of candor to the court.  In July 2016, an incumbent contractor filed a bid protest in the court, challenging a contract award to a competitor for "construction and maintenance of a Structured, High Availability Telecommunications Circuit between Wiesbaden, Germany and Arifjan, Kuwait."  Because performance stays are not automatic in Court of Federal Claims bid protests, the parties disputed whether the court should enter a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to halt performance pending adjudication of the protest.  The Government represented to the court that the awardee was currently getting subcontracts in place and securing necessary permits "so that it can begin performance on December 1, 2016."  In reliance on the representation that no significant performance would occur before December 1, the court did not issue a TRO.  On November 9, the court's clerk contacted the parties to request an update on whether the awardee still intended to commence performance on December 1, 2016.  The Government surprised the court by responding that the awardee had completed the circuit on November 1, and the Government had accepted the circuit and would "start using it any day now."  The judge then entered a TRO staying performance, ordered the procuring agency to submit its files to the Inspector General, and ordered the Government to show cause why Rule 11 sanctions should not be imposed.  In this month's ruling, the court accepted the Government's argument that counsel's representations failed to meet the strict standards for imposing Rule 11 sanctions.  The court nevertheless found that those representations violated the general duty of candor to the court.  The court then ordered the Government lawyer's supervisor to determine whether the lawyer should receive an adverse annual performance review "to impress, not only on him, but on other Government lawyers who practice before the United States Court of Federal claims and other federal courts, that the duty of candor matters."

Takeaway:  Orders such as this are rare in public procurement cases and are good reminders to the Government and private bar alike of the duty "to be truthful, direct, and complete in all communications with federal judges" and other tribunals, and to recognize that courts may expect you to apprise them promptly of changed circumstances that are reasonably likely to be material to the proceedings.

  1. Concourse Group, LLC v. United States, No. 17-129C (Fed. Cl. March 3, 2017):  In this case, the Court of Federal Claims addressed a post-award protest ground alleging various OCIs due to the incumbent awardee's allegedly "unusually close" relationship between the awardee's proposed subcontractor (the incumbent) and the procuring agency.  The court found that the protester knew or should have known of the grounds of its protest "well before contract award."  Two documents upon which the protester relied in making its allegations were public documents accessible before contract award, and the court likewise found the protester was aware of the awardee's interest in the procurement and its relationship with the incumbent contractor.  Citing Blue & Gold Fleet L.P. v. United States, 492 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2007), the court held that the protester waived these OCI grounds by failing to raise them before contract award.

This holding is similar to that of Honeywell Tech. Solutions, Inc., B-400771; B-400771.2, Jan. 27, 2009, 2009 CPD ¶ 49, where GAO held that, although alleged OCIs generally are raised as post-award grounds, a different rule applies "where a solicitation is issued on an unrestricted basis, the protester is aware of the facts giving rise to the potential OCI, and the protester has been advised by the agency that it considers the potential offeror eligible for award."  at 6.  In such cases, GAO requires the grounds to be raised before the next date set for receipt of proposals.  Id. It is not always easy to determine whether a particular OCI concern is a pre- or post-award protest ground.  Here, for example, the Concourse court did not find that the agency advised the protester that it considered the potentially conflicted firm eligible for award while the procurement was still pending – a prerequisite to a pre-award OCI protest under GAO's Honeywell rule.  This raises the possibility that GAO would have found the same OCI ground timely as a post-award protest, even though the Court required it to have been raised as a pre-award protest.  The difficulty in distinguishing pre-award and post-award OCI grounds in each protest forum is a strong reason for discussing such concerns early on with your lawyer.

Takeaway:  If you are aware a competitor has an impermissible OCI, you may be found to have waived the protest ground if you wait until after contract award to file a protest, particularly at the Court of Federal Claims.  Identify potential OCI protest grounds early in the procurement and discuss the possibility of protest with your government contracts attorney.

  1. Peers Health, B-413557.3, March 16, 2017:  The "Late is Late" rule ensures that GAO will never run out of bid protests to deny.  As we have discussed before, agencies ordinarily will reject any proposal not received at the location and by the time specified in the solicitation, regardless of when the offeror submitted the proposal.  In Peers Health, quotations were due by high noon on November 28, 2016, either by email to a specified email address or by regular or overnight mail.  The solicitation incorporated the provision at FAR 52.212-1, which articulates the "Late is Late" rule.  The protester submitted its quotation by email at 11:59 a.m. on the due date specified in the solicitation.  For an unexplained reason, the protester's email was not received by the email address designated in the solicitation until nearly four hours later, at 3:49 p.m.  The agency rejected the quotation as late, and the offeror protested to GAO.  The outcome was not surprising:  regardless of the time the protester submitted the quotation, and regardless of the fact that the quotation apparently spent a few hours in a Government email server before being delivered to the destination address, the dispositive fact here was that the quotation did not reach the designated email address by the established deadline.

The protester argued that the exception for proposals "under the Government's control" in FAR 52.212-1(f)(2)(i)(B) should excuse the late receipt because the quotation was received by a Government server, and was therefore under Government control, prior to the time set for the receipt of quotations. GAO rejected this argument, reaffirming its precedent that this exception does not apply to electronic submissions.  GAO also noted that the quotation could not benefit from FAR 52.212-1(f)(2)(i)(A)'s exception for electronically submitted proposals that are "received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure" by 5:00 p.m. on the preceding workday, as the protester waited until last moment to hit the send button.  "In this regard," GAO observed, "where a vendor waits until one minute before offers are due to submit its quotation, it should expect the possibility that there will be a delay in transmitting it to the specified location, which will result in the quotation being received late."

Takeaway:  Don't wait until the last minute to submit your proposal.  Leave yourself enough time to confirm receipt and, if necessary, to resend in case there are delivery problems.  For electronic submissions, consider submitting your proposal before 5 p.m. the workday before proposals are due to avail yourself of the special exception in FAR 52.212-1(f)(2)(i)(A).

Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions