Case #$2$

In June $2018,$ Talbert Engineering had grown to a company with $$25$ million in sales. The business base consisted of two contracts with the U$.$S$.$ Department of Energy $($DOE$),$ one for $$15$ million and one for $$8$ million. The remaining $$2$ million consisted of a variety of smaller jobs for $$15,000$ to $$50,000$ each. The larger contract with DOE was a five$-$year contract for $$15$ million per year. The contract was awarded in $2013$ and was up for renewal in $2018.$ DOE had made it clear that, although they were very pleased with the technical performance of Talbert, the follow$-$on contract must go through competitive bidding by law. Marketing intelligence indicated that DOE intended to spend $$10$ million per year for five years on the follow$-$on contract with a tentative award date of October $2018.$ On June $21,2018,$ the solicitation for proposal was received at Talbert. The technical requirements of the proposal request were not considered to be a problem for Talbert. There was no question in anyone$$s mind that on technical merit alone, Talbert would win the contract. The more serious problem was that DOE required a separate section in the proposal on how Talbert would manage the $$10$ million$/$year project as well as a complete description of how the project management system at Talbert functioned. When Talbert won the original bid in $2013,$ there was no project management requirement. All projects at Talbert were accomplished through the traditional organizational structure. Line managers acted as project leaders.

In July $2018,$ Talbert hired a consultant to train the entire organization in project management. The consultant also worked closely with the proposal team in responding to the DOE project management requirements. The proposal was submitted to DOE during the second week of August. In September $2018,$ DOE provided Talbert with a list of questions concerning its proposal. More than $95$ percent of the questions involved project management. Talbert responded to all questions. In October $2018,$ Talbert received notification that it would not be granted the contract. During a post$-$award conference, DOE stated that they had no $$faith$$ in the Talbert project management system. Talbert Engineering is no longer in business.

Questions: Use legal terminology and case law citations as much as possible. Please provide an example of a connection to the textbook case with a citation

$1.$ What were the legal reasons for the loss of the contract and explain in detail?

$2.$ Could it have been averted? If yes explain how?

$3.$ Does it seem realistic that proposal evaluation committees could consider management expertise to be as important as technical ability?