GovernmentExecutive.com

The Environmental Protection Agency has come to an agreement with IBM to terminate the temporary suspension barring the vendor from participating in new federal government business, both parties confirmed this morning.

On March 28, EPA placed IBM on the Excluded Parties List System, which GSA maintains to track reprimands issued to federal contractors for violations. The suspension, which was initiated by EPA and extended governmentwide, barred the company from receiving new federal contracts or modifications to new contracts. The move surprised many in the contracting community.

"We have been advised by EPA that the suspension of IBM has been lifted," said a GSA spokesman. "This means that effective immediately we may resume doing business with IBM."

According to IBM's released statement, the company will continue to cooperate with the EPA's ongoing investigation of possible violations of the Procurement Integrity provisions of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act regarding a bid for business with EPA, and with a related investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The contract in question involved the modernization of EPA's financial management system. IBM and federal contractor CGI submitted bids for the contract in 2006, and EPA awarded the $84 million contract to CGI. IBM protested the decision, which the Government Accountability Office sustained. The contract remains stalled until the investigation is resolved.

COMMENTS

• Who knows if the EPA judgement was just or unjust. This is the kind of situation where you really have to be intimate with the details to render any kind of respectable opinion. The news announcements have almost no details at all. The comments below seem to be based soley on emotional impressions about whether IBM is 'good' or 'evil'. Heck - there's 350,000 people in IBM and there's turnover all the time. It's pretty hard to make a generalization about a company that big. Glenn Posted April 11, 2008 12:45 PM
• It does not specify if it was a subcontractor that was under IBM. If so and then being put on the list meant billions lost for IBM if it wasn't taken care of. I see IBM doing whatever it takes to make things right as they did not like being put on suspension list. IBM will even take a loss on this instance just to make sure things are right so they can do future business. It was not "Buffoonery" as Jill says and it does not make EPA look bad. What it did was make IBM look bad and it showed that the EPA would stand up to them and cut all of IBM's business with the government (which DoD won't do since they are so dependent on them). It forced IBM to fix the problem no matter what the cost so they could do business with DoD where most of their business is conducted. The top executives can't always control what their employees do but you be sure that whoever caused the problem is no longer with IBM or if it was a sub contractor then they probably are not welcomed by IBM anymore until they fix the problem in their company. It always flows down hill and someone will pay for the mistake made against the EPA. Good job for the EPA to stand up to a major contractor that none of the other agencies would do because of their dependence on them. Other Agencies had better start looking how the major contractors are doing business with them and have the balls to tell them if they are doing anything wrong. Peter Gilreath Posted April 9, 2008 12:50 PM
• What a farce! Why bother taking the time to go through the motions? This entire matter falls under the category of buffoonery and makes the EPA a prime target for derisive laughter and scorn it so justly deserves for this set of circumstances and waste of time and monies expended to reach this culminating point of indecorous judgment in handling this matter. As for the violations incurred, what is to be the conclusion to this completely ridiculous investigation…a slap on the wrist or, minor chastisement for the infractions under the Procurement Integrity proviso? CAE Posted April 8, 2008 8:03 AM