CBCA 3516

Board: CBCA Agency: Department of Agriculture Appellant: Coast to Coast Computer Products Date: 2017-08-14 Outcome: denied
View full appeal with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
DENIED: August 14, 2017 CBCA 3516, 3749 COAST TO COAST COMPUTER PRODUCTS, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Respondent. Cynthia Malyszek of Malyszek & Malyszek, Westlake Village, CA, counsel for Appellant. Patricia Leigh Disert, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Agriculture, Albuquerque, NM, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), SHERIDAN, and ZISCHKAU. ZISCHKAU, Board Judge. Appellant, Coast to Coast Computer Products (CTC or contractor), appeals the denial of its certified claims seeking $680,638.86 in breach of contract damages, increased costs, constructive changes, and consulting and legal fees arising under its blanket purchase agreement (BPA), and resulting call orders, with respondent, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service (Forest Service or agency). The parties have submitted the case for decision on the written record pursuant to Board Rule 19 (48 CFR 6101.19 (2016)). For the reasons discussed below, we deny the appeals. CBCA 3516, 3749 2 Background I. RFQ and Award On March 7, 2009, the Forest Service issued request for quotes (RFQ) AG-7604-S-09-0004 under the General Services Administration Federal Supply Schedule (FSS). Appeal File, Exhibit 3 (all exhibits are in the appeal file unless otherwise noted). The RFQ was issued for the award of “one (1) or more single-award BPAs” to provide, on an as- needed basis, printers, plotters, scanners, peripherals, and ancillary services. Id. at 82-83 (emphasis omitted). The BPA was divided into three categories: (1) printers/plotters and installation; (2) scanners; and (3) external hard drives. Id. at 82. Bidders could submit quotes on any one or more of the three categories. Id. at 83. The agency did not provide an estimate of the quantity of products it would require under any one of the three categories. Actual quantities, according to the RFQ, would be determined on an as-needed basis, subject to the Government’s determination of need and the availability of funding. Exhibit 3 at 83. Furthermore, the RFQ provided that the Government would be “obligated only to the extent of authorized BPA Calls actually placed against the BPA,” and that “[n]o funds are obligated by issuance of this BPA.” Id. at 83-84 (emphasis omitted). The RFQ listed a ceiling price for the first year of the BPA of $18 million, with a minimum order of $100. The total ceiling price over the term of the BPA, including all option periods and all three categories, was $24 million. Exhibit 3 at 84. CTC alleges that it submitted its quote for category 1 based on an estimated sales volume of $9 million to $12 million out of the first year’s $18 million ceiling. Complaint at 10. CTC received notice of the BPA award for category 1 on October 21, 2009. Exhibit 8 at 194. The contractor’s award was split into two sub-categories. The first sub- category was for printers, plotters, and installation, and the second was for Sharp Multifunction printers. Id. The period of performance for the BPA was set for October 20, 2009, to October 20, 2010. Exhibit 4 at 121. II. Terms of the BPA The BPA incorporated the RFQ and CTC’s proposal, and set forth the performance requirements for CTC. Under section 6.13.1 of the BPA, the contractor was required to participate in a post-award teleconference or on-site meeting to be held within five calendar days after BPA award. Exhibit 4 at 143. CBCA 3516, 3749 3 Section 6.4 (“Warranties”) required that “to promptly fulfill warranty requests, the Contractor shall maintain the necessary spare parts inventory of components that have historically been determined within the industry to require frequent replacement.” Exhibit 4 at 134. Section 9.0 (“Ordering Information”) required the “contractor and Government [to] work together to provide Government offices a catalog listing of approved supplies/services available for purchasing under this BPA.” Id. at 146. The listing was required to include a “description of the supply/service and its applicable BPA pricing,” and the “Contractor’s secure web-site ordering address for internet orders (if available).” Id.