Department of Veterans Affairs

Photo of Olivia LynchPhoto of Brian Tully McLaughlinPhoto of Lyndsay GortonPhoto of Zachary Schroeder

In its recent decision, CVE Appeal of First State Manufacturing, Inc., SBA No. CVE-184-A (2021), the Small Business Administration Office of Hearing and Appeals (OHA) denied an appeal of a decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) to cancel First State Manufacturing, Inc.’s verification of service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) status. CVE issued its Notice of Verified Status Cancellation based on concerns of present responsibility related to a consent judgment entered into merely a month before to resolve a False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuit against First State that required First State to pay over $393,000. Prior to the FCA lawsuit, First State’s Vice President for Marketing/Contract Administration and Chief Executive Vice President/Chief Financial Officer were criminally charged, pled guilty, and were sentenced to prison terms for bribing an Amtrak official to win federal Government contracts. In the appeal before OHA, First State argued that CVE erred in cancelling its verified SDVOSB status for two reasons: (1) the FCA consent judgment was based upon an underlying FCA settlement agreement that did not admit liability or wrongdoing by First State; and (2) the Federal Railway Administration, which oversees Amtrak funding, determined that First State was “presently responsible,” and that the likelihood of future harm to the Government did not warrant suspension or debarment. First State further argued that as the Federal Railway Administration is the agency with the potential injury, its determination of present responsibility should have been given greater deference by CVE.
Continue Reading False Claims Act Consent Judgment Prompts Termination of SDVOSB Status Even Without an Admission of Liability

Photo of Peter J. EyrePhoto of Monica DiFonzo Sterling

This week’s episode covers the Department of Commerce’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking relating information and communications technology and services, an update from the Procurement Collusion Strike Force, GAO testimony about ongoing supply chain challenges at the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the American Jobs Plan, and is hosted by partner Peter Eyre and counsel Monica

In another example of the Court of Federal Claims ("Court") and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reaching different conclusions, the Court sustained a $32 million protest in a recent decision brought against the Department of Veterans Affairs ("VA"), whereas GAO had dismissed the protest as untimely on the grounds that LabCorp should have protested what

In Kingdomware Technologies, B-406507, May 30, 2012, 2012 CPD ¶ —, GAO sustained a protest alleging that the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) improperly used the Federal Supply Schedule (“FSS”), rather than setting aside the procurement for service-disabled veteran-owned small business (“SDVOSB”) concerns. If this scenario seems familiar, that’s because it is.

In several decisions

Federal agencies love green building certification.  According to the United States Green Building Council, 14 federal agencies have implemented initiatives supporting LEED certification, a type of green building rating system.

I had never quite understood why federal agencies were so focused on green building certification for new construction projects. That was, until I read this: