WT Business Beat

By Nick Wakeman

Blog archive
Nick Wakeman

Booz, SAIC square off over sole-source contract

In the protest-happy environment we have today, it is interesting to see some of the big names in the market square off against each other.

We have Harris Corp. and Computer Sciences Corp. battling Hewlett-Packard Co. for the $3.5 billion Navy Next Generation Enterprise Network, and then we have BAE Systems protesting Raytheon’s capture of the $279 million Navy jammer contract. Both of those protests came after long competitions.

But now we have Booz Allen Hamilton fighting the Army and Science Applications International Corp. over a contract that’s never been competed.

Booz filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office over the Army’s decision to sole-source a contract for chemical weapons work to SAIC. The Program Executive Office Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives issued the notice earlier this month under solicitation number W52P1J13R0106.

On July 8, the Army said it would move ahead with the award to SAIC after reviewing and rejecting two responses to an earlier notice of its intent to go the sole-source route.

The notices don’t go into detail on about the value of the work, and I couldn’t find anything on Deltek’s database, but I have to assume that the highly technical nature and risk of working with chemical weapons translates into a nice price tag.

In its justification for going sole-source, the Army said that SAIC had developed the operational plans and permits modifications needed for the work, and had “highly specialized institutional knowledge and expertise.”

The follow-on contract builds on the work that SAIC has done and a sole-source contract is a “logical continuation of previous expended activities/efforts, lessons learned, and costs,” the Army said.

A transition to a new contract would cause “significant delays” and “duplication of costs” that likely wouldn’t be recovered in a competition.

I don’t know what Booz Allen’s grounds are for the protest – I’ve reached out to them, but I haven’t heard back – but no matter the grounds, I see two things going on here:

From the Army’s point of view, a competition and possibly picking a new contractor would cost more money than it’s worth, and wouldn’t be efficient. I don’t have enough of a technical understanding of the work to comment, but it is highly specialized, and there is a limited number of companies that can do it.

I’m sure Booz Allen has company-specific reasons, but their action also says a lot about the state of the market today. The company isn’t asking for a sole-source contract; they just want an opportunity to compete.

And, to me, that speaks volumes about how tight the federal market has become.

Of course, companies have always fought to win work, but today, they also have to fight just for the chance to fight.

Posted by Nick Wakeman on Jul 19, 2013 at 1:08 PM


Reader Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close
SEARCH
contracts DB

Trending

  • Dive into our Contract Award database

    In an exclusive for WT Insider members, we are collecting all of the contract awards we cover into a database that you can sort by contractor, agency, value and other parameters. You can also download it into a spreadsheet. Read More

  • Is SBA MIA on contractor fraud? Nick Wakeman

    Editor Nick Wakeman explores the puzzle of why SBA has been so silent on the latest contractor fraud scandal when it has been so quick to act in other cases. Read More

Webcasts

  • How Do You Support the Project Lifecycle?

    How do best-in-class project-based companies create and actively mature successful organizations? They find the right mix of people, processes and tools that enable them to effectively manage the project lifecycle. REGISTER for this webinar to hear how properly managing the cycle of capture, bid, accounting, execution, IPM and analysis will allow you to better manage your programs to stay on scope, schedule and budget. Learn More!

  • Sequestration, LPTA and the Top 100

    Join Washington Technology’s Editor-in-Chief Nick Wakeman as he analyzes the annual Top 100 list and reveals critical insights into how market trends have impacted its composition. You'll learn what movements of individual companies means and how the market overall is being impacted by the current budget environment, how the Top 100 rankings reflect the major trends in the market today and how the biggest companies in the market are adapting to today’s competitive environment. Learn More!