“The issues on appeal center on the interplay of the Rule of Two mandate in 38 U.S.C. §§ 8127, 8128 and the printing mandate in 44 U.S.C. § 501 requiring the GPO to conduct printing solicitations for federal agencies. The issues are as follows:”
“[W]e hold that the printing mandate in 44 U.S.C. § 501 applies only to the production of written or graphic published materials. Based on the undisputed factual record, we thus conclude that the solicitation at issue here does not involve ‘printing’ within the meaning of 44 U.S.C. § 501, because the goods which are the object of the solicitation (including the components that involve some element of ‘printing’ in a broad sense, such as the wallet card and the imprinted information on the body of the padlocks) are not written or graphic published materials.”
. . . .
“[W]e reverse the Court of Federal Claims’ determination that the printing mandate applied to the solicitation at issue here, and thereby obligated VA to route the solicitation through GPO. We remand to the Court of Federal Claims for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
