Mission Critical Solutions Contract Protest Sustained by U.S. Court of Federal Claims

Online, March 25, 2010 (Newswire.com) - The United States Court of Federal Claims on February 26, 2010 sustained a contact award protest filed by Mission Critical Solutions of Tampa, Fl. The protest by Mission Critical Solutions involved a contract for providing information technology services supporting the U.S. Army's Office of the Judge Advocate General, work that Mission Critical Solutions has been performing for the Army since January 2008. In December 2008 the Army awarded Mission Critical Solutions' incumbent work to Copper River Information Technology, LLC, an Alaska Native Corporation, on a sole-source contract. Mission Critical Solutions filed a protest of this contract award with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in January 2009 that set the legal activity in motion, ultimately involving the Army, the GAO, the Small Business Administration (SBA), the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) of the U. S. Department of Justice, and the U. S. Court of Federal Claims.

The essence of the Mission Critical Solutions case involved what was primarily a legal issue: whether the statutory language of U.S. Code provides for the prioritization of the Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Program over the 8(a) Business Development Program as argued by Mission Critical Solutions, or provides for parity between programs as was argued by the OLC. Mission Critical Solutions is headquartered in the Drew Park section of Tampa in an area that was formerly an Army base (Drew Field) and is categorized as a HUBZone.n writing the Court's opinion sustaining the Mission Critical Solutions protest, Chief Judge Emily C. Hewitt wrote "the court has examined the statutory language of the Small Business Act and concluded the mandatory language of the HUBZone statute requires that a contracting officer first determine whether the specified criteria are met before awarding a contract under another small business program or on a sole-source basis." Judge Hewitt went on to write that "the Army's award of the contract to Copper River on a sole-source basis without first determining whether there was 'a reasonable expectation that not less than [two] qualified HUBZone small business concerns will submit offers and that the award can be made at a fair market price' was not in accordance with the law -in particular, the contract award did not comply with the plain meaning of the HUBZone statute."

The Court ordered the administration to determine whether the criteria specified in U.S. Code 657a(b)(2)(B) are met, such that the contract opportunity at issue in this case must be awarded on the basis of competition among qualified HUBZone small business concerns and enjoined the administration from awarding the contract in a manner that is not in compliance with the small business act.

Unsatisfied with Judge Hewitt's Opinion and, the administration appealed the Court of Federal Claims decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals on 17 March

For additional information, see U.S. Court of Federal Claims case No. 09-864 C. For additional information about Drew Field, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Park_(Tampa),_Florida. For additional information about Mission Critical Solutions, see http://www.mcsoftampa.com.
# # #