On June 2, 2023, the FAR Council issued an Interim Rule to implement the prohibition on having or using TikTok or any successor application or service developed or provided by ByteDance Limited (covered application). Importantly, the prohibition applies not only to Government-issued devices but encompasses contractor and contractor employee-owned devices (e.g., employee devices used as part of a bring-your-own-device program) as well. The Interim Rule took immediate effect and requires new FAR clause FAR 52.204-27, Prohibition on a ByteDance Covered Application, to be included in solicitations issued on or after June 2, 2023. In addition, solicitations issued before the effective date were required to be amended by July 3, 2023, provided that award of the resulting contract(s) occurs on or after the effective date. Existing indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts were required to be modified to include the new clause by July 3, 2023, to apply to future orders. Finally, if exercising an option or modifying an existing contract to extend the period of performance, contracting officers must include the clause. In short, this clause will soon be in most if not all Federal government contracts. Contractors should take action now to ensure that they are prepared to comply with these requirements and that employees are familiar with and trained regarding the prohibition.
As most government contractors have experienced firsthand, procuring agencies routinely engage in a wide variety of communications after bids have been submitted. On occasion, these exchanges are quite minor and afford an offeror the limited opportunity to clarify aspects of its proposal and/or to resolve clerical errors. Sometimes, however, the exchanges are more critical in nature and allow the contractor to submit proposal revisions as part of the negotiation process. When this occurs, the agency is said to have engaged in “discussions” with the contractor. In this scenario, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) imposes a host of obligations on the agency’s conduct.…
In 2006, the documentary An Inconvenient Truth chronicled former Vice President Al Gore’s efforts to educate the public on the consequences of climate change. In the sixteen years since the Academy Award-winning film was released, public interest in the impact that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have had, are having, and will have on our planet has increased exponentially. Most recently, at the 27th U.N. Climate Conference (COP27), countries from around the globe came together to discuss the implementation of battle plans to combat climate change. One such plan, which was discussed at COP 27 by President Biden, is a new Proposed Rule that would require “significant” and “major” federal contractors to disclose their GHG emissions and climate-related financial risk as well as set science-based targets to reduce their GHG emissions. If and when the Proposed Rule is finalized, it will have seismic implications for contractors, in that it ties contractor responsibility (i.e., a contractor’s ability to receive federal awards) to compliance with these requirements.
Continue Reading An Inconvenient Requirement: New Proposed Rule Would Require Federal Contractors to Disclose Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Virtually every year, the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO’s) Bid Protest Annual Report includes “flawed technical evaluations” as one of the top five most common grounds for successful protests. Simply stated, this means that if a protest is to be sustained at the GAO, there is a good chance the Government watchdog will find that the agency failed to evaluate the protester’s and/or awardee’s technical proposal in accordance with the solicitation’s disclosed evaluation methodology. It follows, of course, that more complex evaluation schemes (i.e., those with a multiplicity of factors, sub-factors, and weighting systems) carry a commensurately higher level of risk that agency evaluators will get it wrong. The GAO’s recent decision in AT&T Mobility, LLC provides one such example and is a useful case study for contractors.
Continue Reading The Devil Is in the Details: Recent GAO Decision Underscores the Importance of Checking the Agency’s Math
Unless you’ve been living under a rock or on a self-sustaining deserted island, the chances are high that you have become quite familiar with the term “inflation” (i.e., the rising costs of goods and services) over the past few years. Indeed, everything (from gasoline to gumballs and milk to movie tickets) appears to be more expensive as of late. Unfortunately, government contractors are not immune from this current economic reality. As most of us know all too well, many contracts that were negotiated and priced over the past 18 to 24 months are simply more expensive to perform now than was reasonably anticipated when bids were prepared.
In recognition of these soaring prices, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a May 25, 2022, Memorandum titled “Guidance on Inflation and Economic Price Adjustments,” the purpose of which is to assist contracting officers (COs) in (i) navigating the impacts of inflation on existing contracts and (ii) managing downstream inflation risks on prospective contracts. Here are the key takeaways and our suggested courses of action to best protect your company’s bottom line:…
The Government Contracts and Global Trade Group is pleased to provide a summary of some of the key class deviations and other memoranda published by U.S. Government agencies implementing the federal contractor COVID-19 vaccine mandate (Executive Order 14042). You may find a complete listing of all class deviations at Acquisition.gov.
To view summary click
Four memoranda, released in the last several business days, provide federal contracting officers guidance and suggested clauses to implement President Biden’s Executive Order 14042 (the Executive Order) in federal contracts imposing mandatory vaccination and workplace safety protocols for covered federal contractors and their employees as early as October 15, 2021. Issued by the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) (the FAR Council Memo), the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council (CAAC) (the CAAC Memo), the Principal Director, Defense Pricing and Contracting for the Department of Defense (DoD) (the DoD Memo), and the General Services Administration’s Senior Procurement Executive (the GSA Memo) (which we will be discussing in a separate posting), the memoranda move quickly to provide all procuring activities the necessary tools to ensure that by October 8, all solicitations and contract subject to the Executive Order adhere to its mandates and the evolving guidance issued by the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force (issued September 24) (Task Force Guidance). For those unfamiliar with the Executive Order and the resulting Task Force Guidance, please feel free to review our prior discussions of those issues here and here.
Continue Reading The Clauses Implementing Vaccination Mandate for Federal Contractors Are Out—Key Considerations for Contractors
This article appeared in Law360.
The Safer Federal Workforce Task Force issued on Sept. 24 its guidance for federal contractors and subcontractors[ as required by President Joe Biden’s Sept. 9 executive order on ensuring adequate COVID-19 safety protocols for federal contractors. The guidance was approved by the Office of Management and Budget on the same day.
The guidance contains three key provisions:
- Mandatory vaccination of covered contractor employees who are not legally entitled to accommodation;
- Masking and physical distancing while in covered contractor workplaces in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines; and
- The designation by each covered contractor of a point person or persons to coordinate COVID-19 workplace safety efforts at covered contractor workplaces.
The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Council has returned from an extended vacation to publish a final rule to align the FAR with similar subcontracting regulations implemented by the Small Business Administration more than a half decade ago. McCarter & English Government Contracts and Global Trade co-leaders Franklin Turner and Alex Major and Senior Associates Cara…
If a company has one or more Organizational Conflicts of Interest (“OCIs”), its ability to compete for (and perform) a government contract in a fair and equitable manner is inherently called into question. In the context of a bid protest, this may be one of the most overlooked but “sharpest” grounds that may be available to a protester. In short, an OCI is an instance where “because of other activities or relationships with other persons [or entities], a person [or entity] is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Government, or the person’s objectivity in performing the contract work is or might be otherwise impaired, or a person has an unfair competitive advantage.” FAR 2.101. Understanding the three types of OCIs and the situations in which each typically arises is critical in order for disappointed offerors to execute this riposte in the face of a flawed contract award.
Continue Reading The GAO Sustains Protest Based on Awardee’s Organizational Conflicts of Interest—An Important Lesson for All Contractors