CACI leans on courts to regain eligibility for $9B in Army contracts
Gettyimages.com/ Westend61
By
Nick Wakeman
The company claims it was unfairly eliminated from the competitions for an encryption contract and a hardware contract.
CACI International has turned to the federal courts after it was been eliminated from the competition for a pair of large defense contracts.
One case has been ongoing for several months and involves an Army encryption contract worth $778 million. The second is an Army hardware supply contract with an $8 billion ceiling.
Both cases involve the same customer, but what they have in common are a allegations that CACI had organizational conflicts of interest. The conflicts alleged are very different in each.
Regarding the encryption contract, a Court of Federal Claims judge agreed with the Army that CACI had a conflict because of other work it was doing for the Army that was related to the encryption contract.
CACI has gone to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reverse that decision. Oral arguments took place on Monday.
In the second case, CACI lost a protest at the Government Accountability Office after the Army ruled the company wasn’t eligible to compete for the Common Hardware Systems-6 contract for supplying communication products and other types.
The Army found that CACI had an OCI because a subcontractor had hired a former Army official had been the source selection advisory council chair when the Army awarded CHS-5 to General Dynamics. That official also was the product lead on CHS-3 and CHS-4, according to GAO records.
One of GAO’s findings was that CACI hadn’t thoroughly documented how it would mitigate any possible conflict.
Following the GAO decision, CACI has gone to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for a new hearing of its defense.
CACI’s filing with the court submitted Monday remains sealed, but the company is likely raising many of the same arguments it did at GAO.
Going to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims after losing a case at GAO is not an appeal. The court will not rule on GAO’s decision, but will take a fresh look at the case and has greater authority to enforce bid protest rulings.
Another point worth noting is that General Dynamics is an incumbent on both of the contracts CACI is fighting for. That seems to be just a coincidence. Sierra Nevada is another incumbent on the Army encryption contract.