1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Congress Extends GAO's Bid Protest Jurisdiction Over Certain DoD Task And Delivery Orders

Congress Extends GAO's Bid Protest Jurisdiction Over Certain DoD Task And Delivery Orders

Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.14.11

On January 7, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, which, among other things, extends the Government Accountability Office's ("GAO") protest jurisdiction over certain Department of Defense ("DoD") task and delivery orders through September 30, 2016. However, absent congressional action, GAO's jurisdiction over protests of task and delivery orders under civilian agency procurements will lapse on May 27, 2011 (unless there is an allegation that the order is outside the scope of the underlying ID/IQ contract).

The 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, Pub. L. No. 110-181, established supplemental GAO protest authority for task and delivery orders over $10 million.  Section 843 of that Act contained dual conforming statutes in Title 10 (controlling DoD procurements) and Title 41 (controlling civilian agency procurements) of the U.S. Code.  Those parallel clauses contained a sunset provision, such that this supplemental protest authority would expire on May 27, 2011 ("this subsection shall be in effect for three years, beginning on the date that is 120 days after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008."). 

Section 825 of the NDAA for FY2011 extends until September 30, 2016, GAO's supplemental protest authority over DoD task and delivery order procurements in excess of $10 million.  However, because Section 825 only amends Title 10 (but not Title 41), GAO's supplemental jurisdiction over protests regarding task and delivery order order procurements for civilian agencies in excess of $10 million lapses on May 27, 2011.

 The legislative history does not explain any policy rationale for this incongruity, and we are not aware of any reason to distinguish DoD from civilian agency procurements for these purposes.  It is possible that subsequent legislation will extend the sunset date for civilian agencies.  If not, some interesting questions may arise as the expiration of GAO's jurisdiction approaches.  For example, if a protest is filed before the sunset date, will GAO have jurisdiction to decide that protest and issue a recommendation even if it is unable to do so before the sunset date? 

Insights

Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.26.24

California Office of Health Care Affordability Notice Requirement for Material Change Transactions Closing on or After April 1, 2024

Starting next week, on April 1st, health care entities in California closing “material change transactions” will be required to notify California’s new Office of Health Care Affordability (“OHCA”) and potentially undergo an extensive review process prior to closing. The new review process will impact a broad range of providers, payers, delivery systems, and pharmacy benefit managers with either a current California footprint or a plan to expand into the California market. While health care service plans in California are already subject to an extensive transaction approval process by the Department of Managed Health Care, other health care entities in California have not been required to file notices of transactions historically, and so the notice requirement will have a significant impact on how health care entities need to structure and close deals in California, and the timing on which closing is permitted to occur....