Date: September 9, 2015
Instructions: Please analyze the attached Global Technical Systems case and submit a brief using the format below.
Briefing can be extensive or short depending on the depth of analysis. A comprehensive brief includes the following:
1. Title and Citation. The title of the case shows who is opposing whom. The name of the parties involved in the case. The citation provides the case number which tells how to locate the case.
2. Facts of the Case. A good student brief will include a summary of the pertinent facts and legal points raised in the case. It will show the nature of the litigation, who sued whom, based on what occurrences, and what happened, The facts are often conveniently summarized at the beginning of the GAO's opinion. Sometimes, the best statement of the facts will be found in a denied or sustained opinion. The fact section of a good student brief will include the following elements:
o A one-sentence description of the nature of the case, to serve as an introduction.
o A statement of the relevant regulation or law, with quotation marks or underlining to draw attention to the key words or phrases that are in dispute.
o A summary of the complaint plus relevant evidence and arguments presented to the GAO to explain who did what to whom and why the case was thought to involve illegal or improper conduct.
o A summary of actions taken by contracting officer
3. Issues. The issues or questions of regulation or law raised by the facts peculiar to the case are often stated explicitly by the GAO. Cases frequently involve multiple issues, some of interest only to protestor and lawyers, others of broader and enduring significant. Be sure you have included all issues. When noting issues, it may help to phrase them in terms of questions that can be answered with a precise "yes" or "no."
4. Decisions. The decision is the GAO's answer to a question presented to him for answer by the parties involved or raised by the GAO himself in its own reading of the case. If the issues have been drawn precisely, the decision can be stated in simple "yes" or "no" or sustained or denied answers or in short statements taken from the language used by the GAO.
5. Reasoning. The reasoning, or rationale, is the chain of argument which led the GAO judges in either a sustained or denied opinion.
6. Separate Opinions. Both sustained or denied opinions should be subjected to the same depth of analysis to bring out the major points of agreement or disagreement with the GAO's opinion. Make a note of how each GAO judge made his/her decision and how that decision compares to similar decision in the past (See other cases referenced in the GAO decision, if any). (Include your personal opinion of the GAO decision.)
7. Analysis. Evaluate the significance of the case, its relationship to other cases, its place in history, and what it shows about the GAO, its members, its decision-making processes, or the impact it has on government procurement policy and regulations. It is here that the implicit assumptions and values of the GAO should be probed, the "rightness" of the decision debated, and the logic of the reasoning considered.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 8:25 am ad1c9bdddf
Global Technical Systems versus Department of Navy
GTS filed a protest with the Navy Office challenging the terms of solicitation and agency's decision not to set aside the procurement for small businesses.
Global Technical Systems (GTS) is a small business based in Virginia. The company protested the terms of solicitation issued by the Department of Navy for procuring common processing system technology (TI) 16 equipment. GTS contended that the solicitation should have been set aside for small businesses whereas it did not even provide sufficient information so that offerors could compete on a common basis.
The RFP for procurement of CPS TI 16 was a fixed price indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for a one year base and four option years. The solicitation stated that the award will be made to offeror submitting the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal. The solicitation identified four technical factors on which offers would be evaluated as acceptable or not acceptable. These were
1. Manufacture, assembly, test and engineering: Under this factor, the solicitation required capabilities from offerors to perform these requirements including production engineering, manufacture and assembly, technical requirements, testing requirements, process management, material management, scheduled delivery, product quality assurance, management, resource and facility requirements, and all other requirements of the solicitation. The solicitation also required that the contractor and major subcontractors must demonstrate experience in assembling, testing and delivering equipment similar in size, complexity and scope to CPS TI 16 equipment.
2. Facilities: Under this factor the solicitation required evaluating of offerors facilities for determining if they had sufficient throughput capability and adequate manufacturing processes and calibration processes.
3. Program management & control: Under the program management and control factor, the Navy will evaluate the discussion of risks and mitigation for each identified risk, ability to meet the required lead times of the CPS units, plan for managing subcontractors, and proposed management system.
4. Past performance: Offeror would be rated acceptable on this factor if the Government was able to ascertain that the offeror would successfully perform the required effort, based on the past ...
An analysis of protest by GTS against solicitation of bid by Navy is provided.