Strict Application Of Micro-Purchase Exception Sinks Award
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.15.10
In Rapiscan Sys., Inc. (Mar. 15, 2009), a case handled by C&M, GAO sustained a protest of the award of a purchase order under a Federal Supply Schedule ("FSS") solicitation when the awardee's FSS contract did not include one of the solicitation's required line items. Although the awardee priced the non-FSS item at $0, GAO concluded that the micro-purchase exception did not apply, because the vendor's quotation also stated that the non-FSS item's price (which exceeded the $3,000 micro-purchase threshold) was included in the price of an FSS item.
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
