levels above, Overseas Shipholding Group had been proposed for, but not actually, debarred. The Contracting Officer decided that the proposed debarment of the parent was sufficient to find OSG not responsible and awarded the contract to competitor USS Product Carriers. The Court had to decide if an agency decision not to debar a parent company for admitted legal violations precludes a Contractor Officer (“CO”) from disqualifying the subsidiary that has no legal violations from obtaining a contract because it is non-responsible. The CO must make the responsibility determination.5 Only responsible bidders who are capable of performing the work may be awarded a contract. Among the qualities a bidder or contractor must have in order to be determined responsible is a record of integrity and business ethics.6 A contractor must clearly demonstrate that it is presently responsible, and if it is unable to do so, the CO must determine the contractor as non-responsible.7 Moreover, the CO must satisfy herself that a contractor has the capability to meet the delivery schedule and other requirements of the contract.8 The Court confirmed that “a contracting officer may reject a contractors showing of responsibility as insufficient. The amount of information needed to satisfy the contracting officer that a bidder is responsible is also a matter of discretion.”
mathematics, and structural acoustics. Beyond that, during his career he has reviewed literally hundreds of funding proposals, and knows exactly how to turn a good proposal into a world-class one. He will bring all of your corporate technology strengths together to make the most competitive proposal possible.
The court stated that “a contracting officer is the point person for any Government contract.” FAR requires procurement officers to rule on present responsibility before making a contract award. A decision by a separate Government agency for a different purpose should not bind the contracting officer or limit her decision. The COFC approved the CO’s “unusually” thorough and determined effort to insure her responsibility determination was fair and reasonable. She was conscientious and persistent in performing the duties required of her…. The Government…performed admirably in handling the procurement.”
The COFC distinguished debarment as excluding “the contractor from all Executive Agency” contracts, whereas non-responsibility” excludes the contractor from a specific contract with a single Executive Agency.”
