Photo of Dj Wolff

Moving beyond faxes into the digital age, the Court of Federal Claims in Watterson Constr. Co. v. U.S. (Mar. 29, 2011) found that a contractor’s late proposal should be excused when the delay was caused solely by a “mail storm” at the agency which overloaded and slowed down its servers. The contractor had submitted a proposal by email at 11:01 AM in advance of a 12:00 PM submission deadline. The email was “received” by the first of the Army Corps of Engineers’ servers at 11:29 AM. But, after several employees had hit “reply all” to an email sent to a large number of users, the agency’s servers experience a “mail storm” which delayed the transmission of the email from the server to the Contracting Officer’s inbox until 12:04 PM. As a result, despite earning a higher rating and being $2 million cheaper, the contractor’s proposal was rejected for having been untimely.

Judge Braden found the contractor’s untimely submission to be excused in these circumstances on three independent grounds. First, she found that the proposal was not late as it had been “received by the Government’s e-mail servers before the due date,” even if it had not yet reached the CO’s inbox. Second, even if the proposal was late, Judge Braden found unpersuasive both GAO precedent and CFC dicta to find that the FAR’s “government control” exception applied to e-mail proposals, thus excusing the contractor’s late submission. Finally, Judge Braden analogized the “mail storm” to a more traditional weather emergency, finding that it was an “emergency or unanticipated event which interrupts normal Government processes,” thus entitling the contractor to a 1-day extension under the FAR.

This final holding will likely be the most useful for contractors going forward. By demonstrating its willingness to treat network interruptions as legitimate impediments to timely filing, the CFC cracked the door for contractors whose proposals may previously have been barred as untimely.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Dj Wolff Dj Wolff

David (Dj) Wolff is a partner and attorney at law in the firm’s Washington, D.C. and London offices and a director with C&M International, the firm’s trade policy affiliate.

At Crowell & Moring, he practices in the International Trade Group, where his practice…

David (Dj) Wolff is a partner and attorney at law in the firm’s Washington, D.C. and London offices and a director with C&M International, the firm’s trade policy affiliate.

At Crowell & Moring, he practices in the International Trade Group, where his practice covers compliance with U.S. economic sanctions, export controls and antiboycott regimes, and anti-money laundering (AML) laws and regulations. He is experienced in providing day-to-day compliance guidance, developing compliance programs including through on-site compliance trainings, responding to government inquiries, conducting internal investigations, representing them during civil and criminal enforcement proceedings, and, in collaboration with colleagues, managing the potential conflict of laws that can arise from the interaction between extraterritorial impacts of U.S. regulations and third country “blocking” laws or data privacy regulations. Dj splits his time between Washington and London, working regularly with European clients and colleagues to provide coordinated guidance on U.S., U.K., and EU sanctions compliance and enforcement. Dj also has extensive experience in international mergers and acquisitions, advising both buyers and sellers regarding the international trade implications of a potential deal.