Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Federal Claims
February 4, 2022, Filed
OPINION AND ORDER1
The first population count of the United States began in 1790 under President George Washington.2 The 1790 count was, by today's standards, a rudimentary affair — a mere "single schedule calling [*2] for only two or three details as to the color, sex, and age of the population."3
In contrast, the modern census is "a massive undertaking," complete with resources available in 59 languages and including "brochures, posters, factsheets, and social media toolkits."4 The 2020 census cost the federal government upwards of $14 billion to complete.5 The data produced by today's United States Census Bureau comprises "the primary source of statistics" regarding our nation's economy and population.6 See ECF No. 44, Corrected Administrative Record ("AR") 1215. Over time, the Census Bureau "has become increasingly reliant upon information technology" to maintain and improve the quality of its data. Id. As part of that effort, the Census Bureau's Geography Division maintains the Master Address File/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System ("MAF/TIGER System"), which is comprised of various software applications and databases that integrate spatial and address data from "more than 40,000 tribal, state, and local governments." AR 1215-16.
In this post-award bid [*3] protest, Plaintiff, Golden IT, LLC ("Golden") challenges the decision of Defendant, the United States, acting by and through the Department of Commerce and the Geography Division of the United States Census Bureau ("Census" or the "Agency"), to award a single-award Blanket Purchase Agreement ("BPA") with five one-year options to Defendant-Intervenor, Spatial Front, Inc. ("SFI") for general IT support for the MAF/TIGER System and related programs. Golden objects to the award to SFI as arbitrary, capricious, and otherwise contrary to law. The parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the administrative record pursuant to Rule 52.1 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC").
For the reasons explained below, the Court GRANTS the pending motions to supplement the administrative record. The Court further GRANTS the government's and Defendant-Intervenor's respective motions for judgment on the administrative record. The Court DENIES Golden's motion for judgment on the administrative record.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2022 U.S. Claims LEXIS 57 *; __ Fed.Cl. __; 2022 WL 334369
GOLDEN IT, LLC, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant, and SPATIAL FRONT, INC., Defendant-Intervenor.
Prior History: [*1] Filed Under Seal January 18, 2022.
Census, Solicitation, quoters, key personnel, administrative record, weakness, descriptions, offeror, transition, Subfactor, Spatial, procurement, proposals, map, Staffing, technical factors, scalability, Reply, material misrepresentation, past performance, misrepresentation, documentation, disqualified, Attachment, contracts, volume, assigned, instructions, dedicated, factors
Governments, Courts, Courts of Claims, Public Contracts Law, Bids & Formation, Offer & Acceptance, Acceptances & Awards, Dispute Resolution, Jurisdiction, Bid Protests, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Standards of Review, Arbitrary & Capricious Standard of Review, Competitive Proposals, Administrative Record, Disclosure & Discovery, Contract Interpretation, Ambiguities & Contra Proferentem, Patent Ambiguities, Sealed Bids, Invitations for Bids, Motions