Finally, the Federal Circuit determined the award was not arbitrary or capricious and enforceability of the mitigation plan provided no basis for setting aside the contract. The government's conclusion the plan was sufficient was reasonable, and the awardee was barred from bidding on future requirements in a different category of services. It also was reasonable for the CO to defer evaluating potential unequal access to information conflicts until the awardee bid on future contracts for which it had obtained nonpublic information by performing the contract at issue. As for the enforceability of the mitigation plan, the parties agreed the government had legal recourse to enforce the plan. The CFC's conclusion continuing court oversight was required, based on its belief the CO could not be trusted with enforcement, was not appropriate, because the CO did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in evaluating the mitigation efforts. (Axiom Resource Management, Inc. v. U.S., et al., CA-FC, 53 CCF ¶79,108)
(The news featured above is a selection from the news covered in the Government Contracts Report Letter, which is published weekly and distributed to subscribers of the Government Contracts Reporter. )