Commonwealth Court: Laches Requires Reversal Of Injunction Issued For Violation Of Separations Act

A recent decision by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania illustrates the extreme perils of waiting too long to challenge a violation of the public bidding laws. In December 2015, the West Jefferson Hill School District solicited bids for a new Read more

Regulations Issued For City of Philadelphia Best Value Contracting

On July 27, the regulations governing the City of Philadelphia's purchase of goods and non-professional services under the "best value" standard became official. Under the regulations, the Procurement Commissioner can permit a contract to be awarded under the "best value" Read more

Third Circuit Affirms Decision On DRPA Bridge Contract But Reverses Judicial Award Of Contract To Low Bidder

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed a N.J. federal district court decision which found that that the Delaware River Port Authority (DRPA) had acted improperly in rejecting the low bidder for a painting contract for the Read more

AIA Pennsylvania To Host Debate On Separations Act

On Thursday, July 13, AIA Pennsylvania, the unifying body of the Pennsylvania chapters of the American Institute of Architects, will host a debate on the Separations Act. The moderated debate will take place at Harrisburg University and will feature key players Read more

DGS Issues List Of Exempt Steel Products For 2017

The Pennsylvania Department of General Services (DGS) has finally issued the list of machinery and equipment steel products which will be exempt for calendar year 2017 under the PA Steel Products Procurement Act.  The list was published in the Pa. Read more

Pa. Steel Products Procurement Act, Revisited

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email

The Pa. Steel Products Procurement Act became law in 1978 with a stated purpose to protect the U.S. market for steel production and supply.

At its core, the Act provides that, if any steel products are to be used or supplied on a public works project in Pennsylvania, then only “steel products,” as that term is defined in the Act, can be used or supplied on the project.

The Act defines “steel products” as follows:

Products rolled, formed, shaped, drawn, extruded, forged, cast, fabricated or otherwise similarly processed, or processed by a combination of two or more of such operations, from steel made in the United States by the open hearth, basic oxygen, electric furnace, Bessemer or other steel making process and shall include cast iron products and shall include machinery and equipment listed in United States Department of Commerce Standard Industrial Classification 25 (furniture and fixture), 35 (machinery, except electrical) and 37 (transportation equipment) and made of, fabricated from, or containing steel components. If a product contains both foreign and United States steel, such product shall be determined to be a United States steel product only if at least 75% of the cost of the articles, materials and supplies have been mined, produced or manufactured, as the case may be, in the United States. Transportation equipment shall be determined to be a United States steel product if it complies with section 165 of Public Law 97-424 (96 Stat. 2136).

So, what does this mean?

Read more

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email
Posted on by Christopher I. McCabe, Esq. in Steel Products Act Leave a comment

The U.S. DOT Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email

I have posted on numerous occasions about the U.S. Department of Transportation’s disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) program.  The DBE program is especially relevant to public contractors and subcontractors performing work for PennDOT, SEPTA, the Philadelphia International Airport, the Philadelphia Streets Department, the Port Authority of Allegheny County, and other public entities in Pennsylvania that are managing projects funded with federal transportation dollars.

In this post, I’ll provide some limited background information and links about the DBE program and how the program operates and what rules and regulations apply.

Read more

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email
Posted on by Christopher I. McCabe, Esq. in DBE/MBE/WBE Leave a comment

DBE Pass-Through Scheme Alleged On PennDOT Platt Bridge Project In Phila.

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email

According to a criminal information filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, still another fraud scheme involving the U.S. Department of Transportation’s disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) Program has been uncovered, this time on the federally-funded George C. Platt Memorial Bridge project in Philadelphia.

In April 2011, PennDOT awarded a $42.7M contract to perform structural steel painting and repairs on the Platt Bridge to a joint venture consisting of Hercules Painting Company, Inc., of New Castle, Pa., and Vimas Painting Company, Inc., of Lowellville, Ohio.  During the bid process, the Hercules-Vimas JV allegedly committed to subcontract $3.1M in DBE work to Vertech International, Inc., to supply paint materials for the project.  Instead, the Hercules-Vimas JV allegedly negotiated contracts and ordered materials for the Platt Bridge project directly with non-DBE suppliers, with Vertech allegedly acting as a pass-through to give the appearance that DBE requirements had been satisfied.  PennDOT awarded approximately $1.97M in DBE credit to the Hercules-Vimas JV.  Vertech was allegedly paid 1.75% of the face value of the invoices it processed to act as a pass-through.

Read more

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email
Posted on by Christopher I. McCabe, Esq. in DBE/MBE/WBE, PennDOT Leave a comment

Can The City Of Phila. Purchase Police Body Cameras Under An Existing Contract For Tasers?

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email

Can a public entity add-on to an existing contract in order to satisfy a need for a new and different service, supply or equipment?

On March 7, WHYY’s Newsworks reported that that is precisely what the City of Philadelphia plans to do under an existing stun gun contract with Taser International.  According to the Newsworks report, the City intends to spend more than $200,000 under the Taser contract to purchase police body cameras:

City records show that Philadelphia’s Police Department has a $705,361 contract with Taser that is expected to cover hundreds more cameras, the cost of evidence storage and equipment upgrades. It will also pay for stun guns.

Officials confirm, $210,000 of that will pay for hundreds of new body cameras.

Philadelphia had an existing contract with Taser for the stun guns, so it was easy to piggyback on that for the body cameras.

The City’s intent to spend more than $200,000 to purchase police body cameras under the Taser contract, without open, competitive bidding, may violate the public bidding rules set forth in Article VIII, Chapter 2, of the Phila. Home Rule Charter.  When it comes to the purchase of generic items, like body cameras, the bedrock rule for City contracting is sealed, competitive bidding, duly advertised, with the contract being awarded to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.

Read more

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email
Posted on by Christopher I. McCabe, Esq. in City of Phila., General Leave a comment

City Of Phila. Seeks To Implement Reverse Auction Bidding

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email

The City of Philadelphia has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to implement a reverse auction bidding procedure for the purchase of certain supplies, equipment, services, and concessions in lieu of ordinary, sealed paper bids.

In a reverse auction bidding, sellers compete with each other, in a dynamic, real time environment, until the lowest price is reached, thereby accruing to the buyer – here the City of Phila. – potential savings that might otherwise not be achieved with traditional, one-time paper bid submissions.

Read more

Linkedin Facebook Twitter Plusone Email
Posted on by Christopher I. McCabe, Esq. in City of Phila., Electronic Bidding Leave a comment