Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
At the FEDERAL CONTRACTORS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, we offer innovative business solutions to help you stay ahead of the competition. Our team of experts are dedicated to providing you with the personalized services that cater to your unique business needs.
Overview
The Supreme Court held that the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) set-aside law was mandatory and must be applied to all competitive contract awards, including orders on the Federal Supply Schedules. Awards must also be made to Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSBs) verified as such by the VA.
On June 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that consistent with Public Law 109-461 (38 U.S.C. 8127 and 8128), the VA shall award contracts based upon competition restricted to SDVOSBs or VOSBs when a contracting officer has a reasonable expectation, based on market research, that two or more firms listed as verified in Vendor Information Pages database are likely to submit offers and an award can be made at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States.
Background:
February 15, 2016
APTAC staff article
At long last, the Supreme Court is set on February 22, 2016, to hear Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. vs United States, which charges the US Department of Veterans Affairs with creating loopholes to avoid a statutory contracting preference for veterans. This is a critical moment for Veteran-owned and Service-Disabled Veteran-owned Small Businesses; fortunately, there are some tremendous resources- including real-time blogs and a free webinar recapping the oral arguments – for those wishing to stay informed.
At issue is the requirements of the Veterans Benefits, Health Care and Technology Act of 2006 (the “VA Act”) directed the VA to prioritize SDVOSBs and VOSBs in agency contracting. The VA Act directed the VA to establish annual goals for contracting with SDVOSBs and VOSBs. The VA Act then establishes a contracting preference for SDVOSBs and VOSBs, codified at 38 U.S.C. § 8127(d):
(d) Use of Restricted Competition.— Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), for purposes of meeting the goals under subsection (a), and in accordance with this section, a contracting officer of the Department shall award contracts on the basis of competition restricted to small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans if the contracting officer has a reasonable expectation that two or more small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans will submit offers and that the award can be made at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States.
Elsewhere, the statute specifies that SDVOSBs are to be given top priority under this “rule of two” process; VOSBs have the second highest-priority.
The SDVOSB and VOSB priorities created under the VA Act were widely viewed as a “Veterans First” policy under which veteran-owned businesses would be preferred for all VA procurements. But instead of applying the “rule of two” across the board, the VA has taken the position that it can buy goods and services using the Federal Supply Schedule without first considering SDVOSBs or VOSBs. The VA’s position has enabled the VA to circumvent SDVOSBs and VOSBs whenever goods or services were available on the FSS.
A number of bid protests in response to this practice have been upheld by the GAO, which stated in Aldevra, B-405271, B-405524 (Oct. 11, 2011) that the law was “unequivocal; the VA ‘shall’ award contracts on the basis of competition restricted to SDVOSBs where there is a reasonable expectation that two or more SDVOSBs will submit offers and award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.” But the Court of Federal Claims held that the VA had reasonably interpreted the VA Act, and the Federal Circuit court upheld that decision. The issue will now be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
https://www.aptac-us.org/news/supreme-court-determine-critical-vosb-sdvosb-contracting-issue/
TEAMS MEETING
Discussion Overview
The Supreme Court held that the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) set-aside law was mandatory and must be applied to ...
TEAMS MEETING
Copyright © 2022 All Rights Reserved
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.