Bob Tompkins chairs Patton Boggs’ Civilian and Defense Contractors practice group. Mr. Tompkins provides strategic advice and counsel to government contractors, their owners and investors, and represents government contractors in many facets of the complex procurement process.

Mr. Tompkins advises entities on strategies for growing their federal contracting business, including participation in programs offered by the U.S. Small Businesses Administration (SBA) such as 8(a), HUBZone and Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Concerns. Mr. Tompkins has counseled government contractors on participation in SBA's 8(a) mentor-protégé program, and in forming joint venture and teaming arrangements with other entities to effectively pursue complex government procurements. He has also helped several small businesses obtain HUBZone certification and establish themselves as HUBZone contractors.

Mr. Tompkins’ practice has a particular focus on assisting Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) and Indian Tribes participating in the SBA’s 8(a) Business Development Program. He has substantial experience in the special program requirements and benefits available to business concerns owned by Tribes and ANCs, and has represented these Native organizations and their businesses at all stages of development. Mr. Tompkins’ experience includes advising entities on preparing and applying for admission to the 8(a) Program; establishing effective internal controls and risk management policies to ensure program compliance; structuring business arrangements with other concerns, including teaming agreements, subcontracts, joint ventures and administrative services agreements in compliance with SBA requirements and in government proceedings including size determinations, appeals to SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals and in investigations by the SBA’s Office of Inspector General.

Mr. Tompkins also has represented numerous government contractors, private equity firms and venture capital firms in conducting due diligence of potential acquisition or investment targets in the government contracts space, with a special focus on transactions involving target companies with small business or 8(a) contract backlogs.

He is experienced in counseling clients on the preparation of bids and proposals, and in interpreting and complying with federal procurement law. He has represented clients in numerous bid protests, at federal agencies, at the Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Mr. Tompkins has also litigated pre-and post-award protests in various federal courts, and defended government contractors accused of fraud and False Claims Act violations.

In addition, he has litigation and counseling experience in internal corporate investigations and audits; internal corporate governance and affairs; and various business and business tort issues including: trade secrets and confidentiality agreements, non-competition agreements and employment agreements.

Mr. Tompkins' experience also extends to federal grants and cooperative agreements. He has counseled clients on complying with OMB circulars and other regulations governing federal assistance agreements. He has also assisted clients in developing compliance programs to meet the administrative and regulatory requirements that accompanying the receipt of federal funds.

Representative Matters:

Bid Protest Success Highlights

GAO Protests

• Protest of Ahtna Technical Solutions, Inc., B-401205 (2009). Successfully protested Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) award of contract in excess of $130 million for detention facility management. Agency took corrective action by cancelling the awarded contract in the face of meritorious grounds of protest related to the agency’s flawed evaluation of proposals. Awarded attorneys’ fees and costs.
  

• Protest of Vantage Vehicles International, B-400685.2 (2009). Successfully defended award by General Services Administration (GSA), for the benefit of the U.S. Air Force (USAF), of a significant contract for light trucks to client Tiger Truck, an Oklahoma-based light truck manufacturer, brought by a competitor offering non-TAA compliant Chinese manufactured trucks. Protest dismissed after GAO’s outcome determination conference. 
  

• Medical Staffing Joint Venture, LLC, B-400705 (2009). Successfully represented intervenor in challenge to U.S. Army Medical Command procurement for medical staffing services. 
  

• Protest of Tiger Truck, LLC, B-400685 (2008). Successfully represented Tiger Truck in a case of first impression involving the Trade Agreements Act (TAA). At issue was the GSA’s decision to award an $11million-plus contract to an offeror admittedly offering Chinese manufactured products, despite having a TAA-compliant offer from Tiger Truck. After a hearing, GAO sustained protest on the grounds that the agency had failed to follow the procedures required under the FAR and the TAA. Awarded attorneys’ fees and costs. 
  

• Protest of Detekion Security Systems, Inc., B-298235.2 (2006). Successfully represented awardee/intervenor in a series of protests over a $12 million Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons contract for complex lethal electric fences awarded to client. The contract at issue was the first of many contemplated by DOJ/BOP to cover ultimately 88 federal maximum security facilities.
  

• Protest of DataFlow/Alaska, Inc., B-299577 (2006). Successfully protested award of a contract by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA) on the grounds that the agency performed a flawed technical evaluation and best value analysis of proposals. Agency took corrective action and cancelled the challenged contract. 
  

• Protest of TDF Corporation, B-296629 (2005). Successfully protested award of an 8(a) contract by the Department of the Army for work previously performed by our client, TDF, a small business on the grounds that the awarding agency failed to undertake a proper adverse impact analysis in accordance with FAR Part 19. Agency took corrective action and cancelled the 8(a) contract. 
  

• Protest of Planned Systems International, Inc., B-292319.1, et seq (2003). In a series of protests to the GAO and in a related appeal to the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals, successfully defended against a protest of award of an $11 million National Science Foundation (NSF) contract to our client.
  

Court of Federal Claims Protests 

• Hawaiian Dredging, Construction Co., Inc. v. United States, and Nova Group, Inc U.S. Court of Federal Claims, 48 CCF ¶78,160, 59 Fed. Cl. 305, (Jan. 9, 2004). With lead counsel, Doug Proxmire, successfully represented a disappointed bidder in two concurrent bid protests before the Court of Federal Claims. Despite being the low bidder by a combined $2 million, the Navy disqualified client from award of two contracts for dredging and repair operations at Pearl Harbor, and awarded contracts to competitors. Our team succeeded in having the Court of Federal Claims order the Navy to cancel both contracts and award contracts to the firm’s client.

Investigations and Administrative Matters 

• Represented several contractors in Congressional probe of contracting practices, and provided guidance on developing appropriate responses to document requests. 
• Successfully represented an 8(a) company in suspension and termination proceedings, including filing appeals at SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals resulting from an adverse Office of Inspector General Audit. 
• Successfully represented a contractor and its principal owner and officer in a suspension and debarment action brought by the United States Army. 
• Represented several Alaska Native Corporations in responding to an inquiry by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. 
• Succeeded in having a federal agency lift its suspension of a cooperative agreement with an industry research foundation. Because of Mr. Tompkins’ efforts, the foundation avoided a permanent termination of several million dollars in research funding, and the agency released several hundred thousand dollars in withheld payments.