Recent ODRA Cases
Results: 454 Records found| FAA Order | ODRA-11-602 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matter | Protest of Systems Research and Applications Corporation Pursuant to Solicitation No. DTFAWA-09-R-05084 | |||
| Docket | 10-ODRA-00562 | |||
| Date Served | 08/08/2011 | |||
| Decision | Systems Research and Applications Corporation (“SRA”) protests the award of a Contract to Lockheed Martin Corporation Information Systems & Global Services (“Lockheed Martin”). The Contract (“Contract”), issued under Solicitation DTFAWA-09-R-05084 (“Solicitation” or “SIR”), is potentially worth $1.4 Billion dollars for the total contract period, which is comprised of a base period of four years and two 3-year option periods. The protested award is for the National Airspace System Integration Support Services (“NISC”). NISC provides professional, technical, and planning support for various Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) organizations, which are responsible for the National Airspace System (“NAS”). The contract type is cost-plus-award-fee. The ODRA finds that the challenged award to Lockheed Martin has not been shown to lack a rational basis or otherwise to have been arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion. The ODRA therefore recommends that the Protests be denied on all grounds. (Findings and Recommendation and Order). | |||
| FAA Order | ODRA-11-585; ODRA-11-597 | |||
| Matter | Protest of Apptis, Inc., Under Solicitation No. DTFAWA-09-R-SE2020-SIR2FO | |||
| Docket | 10-ODRA-00557 | |||
| Date Served | 07/14/2011 | |||
| Decision | Protest sustained. Apptis, Inc. (“Apptis”) protested the award of a second cost-plus-fixed-fee, task order contract to TASC, Inc. (“TASC Contract”). The TASC Contract is for Systems Engineering Support Services for the Agency’s Systems Engineering 2020 Program (“Program”). The Protest challenged the award on several grounds, but the ODRA called for initial briefing on the first ground of protest, i.e., whether the Solicitation permitted multiple awards. The ODRA found that Solicitation provided for only one award. The ODRA also rejected the Product Team’s argument that a rational basis justified the second award regardless of whether the terms in the Solicitation or the AMS permitted multiple awards. In a Supplementary Statement, the ODRA Director noted that the AMS provides “significant flexibility and discretion to contracting personnel,” but does not condone “actions that are inconsistent with the principles, policies, and mandatory procedures of the AMS itself.” The Administrator’s first Order in this matter sustained the protest on the first ground, and ordered the parties to provide further briefing on the appropriate remedy. (Findings and Recommendation) and (Order No. ODRA-11-585 (05/13/2011)). The parties subsequently engaged in an alternative dispute resolution process (“ADR”) that resulted in a joint submission to the ODRA regarding the remedy. Specifically, the parties advocated that the TASC Contract remain in place to fulfill a contingency in a separate agreement between TASC and Apptis. The ODRA found that the proposed remedy satisfied the standard found at 14 C.F.R. § 17.21(b), and was consistent with the FAA’s unique statutory mandate at 49 U.S.C. § 40110(d)(1) to resolve bid protests using consensual ADR techniques to the maximum extent practicable. (Findings and Recommendations on Final Remedy). The Administrator adopted and incorporated the ODRA’s recommendation to let the TASC Contract remain in place and not be terminated for convenience. (Order No. ODRA-11-597 (07/14/2011)). | |||
| FAA Order | ODRA-11-597 | |||
| Matter | Protest of Apptis, Inc. Under Solicitation No. DTFAWA-09-R-SE2020-SIR2FO | |||
| Docket | ||||
| Date Served | 07/08/2011 | |||
| Decision |
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR INTERVENTION FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FINAL ORDER |
|||
| FAA Order | ODRA-11-594 | |||
| Matter | Protest of Security Aviation | |||
| Docket | 11-ODRA-00577 | |||
| Date Served | 06/09/2011 | |||
| Decision | The Protest challenges the award of a contract (“Contract”) to Alaska Air Transit (“AAT”) for air transportation services between Kenai and Middleton Island, Alaska. The Contract was awarded under Solicitation DTFANM-10-R-00010 (“Solicitation”), issued by the Federal Aviation Administration’s (“FAA”) Northwest Mountain Region (“Region”). SA filed the Protest “on the basis that the FAA failed to perform its due diligence prior awarding this contract to an operator who does not meet the equipment requirements of the RFO.” The Region’s Motion to Dismiss the Protest as untimely (“Motion”) currently is before for the ODRA for consideration as a preliminary matter. In accordance with the ODRA Procedural Regulation at 14 C.F.R. § 17.19(e), SA was provided an opportunity to respond to the Motion, but failed to do so by the established deadline (or thereafter). For the reasons stated below, the ODRA finds that the Protest was not timely filed and therefore grants the Region’s well supported, unopposed Motion and recommends that the Protest be dismissed with prejudice. (Decision on Motion to Dismiss and Order). | |||
| FAA Order | ODRA-11-587 | |||
| Matter | Protest of Rivertown Contractors, Inc. Pursuant to Solicitation No. DTFACN-11-R-21014 | |||
| Docket | 11-ODRA-00573 | |||
| Date Served | 05/18/2011 | |||
| Decision | This bid protest (“Protest”) was filed by Rivertown Contractors, Inc. (“Rivertown”) with the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) Office of Dispute Resolution for Acquisition (“ODRA”) on April 12, 2011. The Protest challenges the Contracting Officer’s decision finding Rivertown’s proposal nonresponsive and its subsequent elimination from further competition. The underlying Solicitation, No. DTFACN-11-R-21014 (“Solicitation”) was for services related to the relocation of Localizer and Distance Measuring Equipment at Clinton Municipal Airport in Clinton, Iowa, and was issued by the FAA’s Central Region (“Region”). For the reasons set forth below, the ODRA finds that Rivertown’s proposal failed to satisfy the explicit requirements of the Solicitation regarding detailed past performance information. Therefore, the ODRA recommends that the Protest be denied. (Findings and Recommendation and Order) | |||
| << See prev 5 >> See next 5 << Top >> < New Search > | ||||
Page Last Modified: 04/29/11 15:32 EDT