APPEAL TO ASBCA

The boards of contract appeals follow the "American Rule," which means that each party bears its own costs. However, the Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 504, allows a qualified party who prevails in the case to recover reasonable fees and expenses. In order to be qualified a firm must be an individual with a net worth of $2,000,000 or less or an unincorporated business, partnership, corporation, association, unit of local government, or organization with a net worth of $7,000,000 or less. For more information see Equal Access to Justice Act ASBCA Procedures, available at: http://www.asbca.mil/Rules/rules.html.

while the Edwards answer above is excellent, I restate parts in my own words for clarity.

I deal daily with folks for whom English is a foreign language, like Rodolfo, and sometimes they benefit from hearing the same thing two different ways.

Q.1. Reasonable fees can include attorneys, expert consultants, and even a typist to put the letter in the mail.

Q.2. Even if you lose, the Government cannot make you pay their costs.

About 6 years ago, DOD asked the HASC to look into allegedly "frivilous" GAO protests and to consider slapping such fees on losing protestors as a way to discourage aggrieved bidders from seeking accountability.

The Chairman asked Comptroller General Walker to testify.

I assume the Chair didn't like the idea, because Walker's stance on accountability was well known.

It was predictable that this Rumsfeld initiative would get shot down.

The hearing transcript shows GAO telling the Committee that protestors and their protests are good for the system, acting as "private attorneys general."

GAO also said that they didn't want to create a new, additional "frivilous" test, when the current system didn't have any problem dealing with protests where the merits were not clear.

Rodolfo, to recover consultant costs incurred in pursuing an appeal to the ASBCA, the contractor must meet the criteria stated in the Equal Access to Justice Act. If the contractor does not meet those criteria, the costs of the consultant incurred in pursuing the appeal are not reimburseable as an allowable cost in accordance with FAR 31.205-47.

OK, Brian, I have to ask. On what basis did you decide that English is a foreign language for Rudolfo? Really curious.

Bless you, Paul.

Brian - was your conclusion that English was a foreign language for Rudolfo based on (1) his Italian name, (2) his very good but less than perfect English, and (3) his location in Italy?

Paul,

sorry to take so long to reply.

I sometimes forget to check this site out for months.

The start of Alzheimer's, maybe.

I assumed that Rodolfo was Italian because the two sentences in Question 1 have a perfectly sensible sentence structure that is rarely used in English, putting the verbs in places I didn't expect. He also assumes and omits filler words that a native English speaker usually adds for flow.

His English is excellent, but not native.

I speak a couple of European languages, one better than the others.

I even got pro pay as a soldier for being a supposed "linguist" when I was an E-5, probably before you were born. It made up for the jump pay I lost when I went overseas.

Rodolfo's English is better than my Chermin ever was.

What say you, Rudy ?

Obrigado. Prego.