Court narrows scope of T4NG2 protest case

Gettyimages.com/David Talukdar

Find opportunities — and win them.

Arguments against how the Veterans Affairs Department evaluated bids for the $60 billion IT vehicle are allowed, but other claims will not move forward.

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has narrowed the areas protesters can pursue in their battle over the Veterans Affairs Department's T4NG2 contract vehicle.

VA had argued for a complete dismissal of all the lawsuits challenging awards for the $60 billion Transformation Twenty-One Total Technology Next Generation 2 vehicle for IT solutions and services.

The department received 173 proposals and chose 30 winners.

Protesters raised multiple issues around the evaluations including small business participation, veteran employment and relevant experience. They also challenged VA's decisions to only choose 30 companies and allow joint ventures to be considered service-disabled, veteran-owned businesses.

VA requested that the court dismiss all these challenges.

But Judge Molly Silfen is allowing the challenges to the small business evaluations, veteran employment and relevant experience to stand. These protest points will move forward.

In a ruling handed down Thursday, she said the arguments against the number of awards and VA's decision to allow joint ventures to be considered SDVOSBs will not move forward.

VA argued that protesters should have challenged those points when it released the solicitation and before the awards.

On the number of awards, the judge rejected the protesters' argument that VA had the discretion to make more than 30 of them and should have made clear that it would not go above that number. The protesters argued that lack of clarity created an opening for protests.

The judge disagreed and ruled VA was clear about the 30 awards. While the solicitation left open the option for more than 30 awards, the judge wrote "the solicitation did not require the government to exercise the option."

On the joint ventures matter, VA successfully argued the solicitation did not require the JV to be certified as an SDVOSB. Only the managing partner needed certification.

The judge also dismissed a protest filed by Tribility, a joint venture of Trilogy Federal and Ibility.

Tribility failed to name a "responsible manager" for the joint venture, which the solicitation required.

What's next? Several protesters have filed motions for judgment. The court has sealed these motions and it has not set a schedule for a hearing. Other protesters and VA will make more filings in the coming weeks.

Click here to download the judge's decision.

NEXT STORY: CMMC's final rule has now landed