정부조달계약에 있어서 행정적 분쟁해결절차의 활성화를 위한 연구

The government procurement contracts are governed by multiple statutes and extensive regulations. As procedures for legal remedy, there are bid protests, contract claims and disputes under Contract Disputes Act. Bid protests generally involve issues related to the competition for the contract award while claim and disputes typically arise in the context of the performance of the contracts. A bid protest may be filed with the Contracting agency responsible for the procurement or Government Accountability Office(GAO) or Court of Federal Caims(CFC). It is also possible to file protests with more than one of these three entities. The number of bid protest cases filed at the GAO has 1,146 in FY 2001, 1,327 in FY 2006, 1,989 in FY 2009. On the other hand, the number of CFC has averaging sixty three cases annually. The Contract Disputes Act(CDA) revamped the disputes process. The CDA specifically authorized federal agencies to establish Boards of Contract Appeals (BCA). Under the CDA, the boards are established as independent, quasi judicial forums that do not act as representatives of and, in fact, are quite distinct from their respective procuring agencies. Board judges must have at least five years' experience in public contract law, are usually appointed by a senior official of their agency, and are only removed for good cause. Also board judges are required to have Government contracts experience. The decisions of the boards are collegial. The board decisions are generally the work of a panel of three judges. A majority of judges on the panel must agree for the decision to be issued. The procedures for administrative remedies are needed to be activated. Administrative procedures are much more efficient remedies than judicial procedures. So, through ensuring the independence and the experience of the administrative tribunal like Boards Of Contract Appeals(BCA) in the United States, activation of administrative remedies will be pursued.