Whenever there was an acquisition, no matter how it was done—sole source, competitive, etc.—what we would do is make sure the rules had been appropriately followed and the decisions had been appropriately supported. If there were a decision, for example, to sole-source, we would look at the four criteria that were just mentioned, or we might look at this urgent operational requirement criterion. We would go back and make sure that, in any acquisition, the department had appropriately applied the rules and had documented why it felt that it was an emergency situation or a national interest question, or whatever. Why did it feel that was the case? If it was with regard to a sole-source contract, did it seem to have appropriately supported why it chose that part of the sole-source criteria to justify a sole-source contract?
On May 1st, 2017. See this statement in context.