About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

24 Fed. Cir. B.J. 263 (2014-2015)
Review of Record Review: Application of the Administrative Procedure Act Standard in Bid Protests before the United States Court of Federal Claims

handle is hein.journals/fedcb24 and id is 279 raw text is: 




Review of Record Review: Application

of the Administrative Procedure Act

Standard in Bid Protests Before the

United States Court of Federal Claims


By William J. Grimaldi, Domenique Kirchner, William P. Rayel;
   Edited by Kirk T. Manhardt

Introduction
  Although it is beyond cavil that, under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) standard of review, a court must review the agency's decision based
upon the agency's record,' parties often disagree as to the contents of that
record. In bid protests before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (Court of
Federal Claims), parties often dispute both the contents of the administrative
record and their respective ability to supplement that record with extra-record
evidence.2 'The Court of Federal Claims, prior to 2009, often utilized case
law that relied upon the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) decisions such as Esch v. Yuetter' when resolving
such disputes.4
  Then, in 2009, in Axiom Resource Management, Inc. v. United States,5 the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) tackled the
subject of supplementation of the administrative record in bid protests, in-
structing the Court of Federal Claims that reliance upon Esch is problematic.6
Rather, the Federal Circuit held that the Court of Federal Claims should limit
supplementation to cases in which the omission of extra-record evidence pre-



   * Domenique Kirchner is a Senior Trial Counsel in the United States Department of
Justice, Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, National Courts Section. William J.
Grimaldi and William P. Rayel are Trial Attorneys in the National Courts Section. Kirk T.
Manhardt is an Assistant Director in the National Courts Section. This article represents the
authors' personal views and does not represent the official views of the Department ofJustice.
    5 U.S.C. § 706 (2012).
    See PlanetSpace, Inc. v. United States, 90 Fed. Cl. 1, 4 (2009).
    876 F.2d 976 (D.C. Cit. 1989).
    See id. at 991.
    564 E3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
    6 Id. at 1380.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most