CFC Dismisses Adverse Past Performance Challenge
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.29.10
In Kemron Envtl. Servs., Inc. v. U.S. (May 27, 2010), the Court of Federal Claims dismissed the contractor's complaint that the government issued an unfair, inaccurate, and unreasonable evaluation of its performance, finding that the contractor had failed to meet a jurisdictional prerequisite required by the Contract Disputes Act: that it file a "claim" with the contracting officer. Though the contractor engaged in a series of written and electronic communications with various individuals at the agency expressing its disagreement with its past performance evaluation, the Court concluded that none of the communications constituted (1) "a written demand seeking . . . other contract relief[] . . . as a matter of right" (2) "submitted to the contracting officer for a decision."
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
