the internal guidelines and joke a could not have received a contract award is a joke emv if the department had followed guidelines and jaw to do contract it could have gone to their own business of some sort but not for  law the highest priority for services so if any item is on the voter one list it then must be purchased from the provider that provides those services through building one program  make determinations as to whether a contract for goods or services is on the ability one l to needs to work closely with the agencies in order to ascertain a nice was understand what the agency needs in order to make sure that it can provide that this is not a competition process the the committee wants  program or does the committee go to the agency has it working the way in this particular instance the committee found out about the agency's need through a source of sought notification that the contract officer had  go find someone who qualifies under the program and then that person enters into a contract with the agency or is it mission that enters into the contract  whether this is going to be under the veterans program or the ability one program and the court has not said anything about do you listing the services with the committee would that have been released within the jurisdiction of a cour journalist is a mandatory source of supply if the item is on the list the agency does not have discretion as to where they obtained it they must by law tenets from the provider that is on the list so that if i did  i think you are honest i would like to first address the issue of standing i want be very clear on the timing here there was initial five year contract then there was a follow on six month extension of the contract their issue or the properly found that we had demonstrated that we would lose a contract but for the rescinding of the listing on the ability one program if you don't meet the criteria do you yes we do we do because vision of small business and therefore they can possibly get this contract after they adhere to the requirements but in reality until they actually won that contract and so in theory i guess we that's right and in terms of what happened there after angelica won the following contract now i would agree that we would not have qualified to win based on know i got a very word so what the court decided below i also think was proper so let me focus on that ok which is that if then job lost an opportunity to bid on a contract award of any direction  i would say that the circumstances of move the order yes does not challenge the jurisdiction of court or claims to hear big protest concerning the committee that some picks six of their reply great and when you consider that in conjunction with this board said most recently in the turner constructions case that six forty mister the community makes the of the decision as to whether something's going to be on the building one lives correct correct one what  web website so the agency has determined that this is a proper type of service to be included on the ability one list so that's their goal they make the official initial determination and i heard  that takes at least six months according to the information found down below so if it's not on the list by the time that morphy is is awarded some position where you can't get it from the ability one less you have to wait at the five year contract you have to wait another five years get it listed on the ability one list for that particular service so it's a it's a decision of one this is the type of service you're going to build on this and two there's the timing allowed enough timing  there is nothing that in there that precludes jurisdiction from another court and taking the other way there's nothing in the tucker act as amended that clued claims from addressing these types of issues say in each it's perfectly ok and that would be the position i would take and the cases that were cited by the v a all of which say this is the exclusive remedy is the exclusive way to address the specific issue and that's just not the case  reply in july thirteenth when was the in the nature of the yes days i'm guessing a little it may have been during eid i don't recall specifically i could certainly find that out and get back with the specific date contracts were awarded the agency saw parading under dodge letters injunction they decided that there was not enough time to comply with the veteran's benefits act and also to work with nish to again get this  that's the situation we're dealing with here but protests by the nature curb because agencies have a pressing need for a good or a service it's very difficult for those to be appealed we have an opinion here that only applies to this case and this case is now one so what then is the government's rational argument with respect to this case as i understood it was standing in other words they were your eyes and i understood your position you should even go to the merits of this case court because there is no not even any standing to bring it which would mean the government was pressing us not to necessarily at all decide this issue which you're now saying is the be all and end all for why you need to be here today because you need an