Photo of Steve McBradyPhoto of Skye MathiesonPhoto of Michelle ColemanPhoto of Rob SneckenbergPhoto of Charles BaekPhoto of Eric HerendeenPhoto of John Nakoneczny

The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA or Board) recently published its Annual Report for FY 2024, providing statistics regarding the adjudication of appeals between contractors and civilian agencies. This year, the civilian agencies with the highest number of docketed claims at the Board were the Department of Veterans Affairs, the General Services Administration, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Agriculture. These agencies accounted for 126, or 76%, of the 165 Contract Disputes Act (CDA) appeals docketed at the Board. 

Continue Reading CBCA’s FY 2024 Report – Examining the Numbers
Photo of Steve McBradyPhoto of Rob SneckenbergPhoto of Skye MathiesonPhoto of Michelle ColemanPhoto of Charles BaekPhoto of Eric HerendeenPhoto of Tyler Piper

On December 17, 2024, the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (Board) announced its plan to launch a new Electronic Docketing System (EDS).  Once implemented, the Board will require use of the new EDS for most submissions. 

For individuals already registered with the Government Accountability Office’s Electronic Protest Docketing System (EPDS), the EDS interface and functionality will be similar.  As with EPDS, it appears that EDS submissions will be accessible only to those private-party and agency representatives litigating the matter.

The Board originally planned to launch the new EDS on January 1, but the Board has temporarily postponed the launch to allow practitioners more time to register.  In the meantime, contractors and their counsel should be aware of this impending change and review the Board’s guidance (linked here) to ensure timely and appropriate filings in CDA appeals and FEMA arbitrations.

Photo of Peter J. EyrePhoto of Kris D. Meade
Labor and Employment under the New AdministrationThis week’s special edition focuses on what contractors can expect from the incoming administration relating to labor and employment matters, and is hosted by Peter Eyre and Kris Meade. Crowell & Moring’s “Fastest 5 Minutes” is a biweekly podcast that provides a brief summary of significant government contracts legal and regulatory developments that no government contracts lawyer or executive should be without.

ListenCrowell.com | PodBean | SoundCloud | Apple Podcasts 

The following is an installment in Crowell & Moring’s Bid Protest Sustain of the Month Series.  In this series, Crowell’s Government Contracts Practice will keep you up to date with a summary of the most notable bid protest sustain decision each month.  Below, Crowell Consultant Cherie Owen discusses DecisionPoint Corporation- fka Emesec Inc., in which GAO sustained a protest where the agency failed to consider the impact of a recent corporate transaction on an offeror’s pending proposal.

Continue Reading November 2024 Bid Protest Sustain of the Month: GAO Reminds Agencies that They Must Consider the Impact of a Corporate Transaction When Evaluating Proposals
Photo of M.Yuan ZhouPhoto of Adelicia R. CliffePhoto of Alexandra Barbee-Garrett
New Administration – Domestic Preferences and Supply Chain Security

This week’s special edition focuses on what contractors can expect from the incoming administration relating to domestic preferences, supply chain security and sourcing, and evolving requirements and enforcement, and is hosted by Yuan Zhou, Addie Cliffe, and Alex Barbee-Garrett. Crowell & Moring’s “Fastest 5 Minutes” is a biweekly podcast that provides a brief summary of significant government contracts legal and regulatory developments that no government contracts lawyer or executive should be without.

ListenCrowell.com | PodBean | SoundCloud | Apple Podcasts 

Photo of Caroline BrownPhoto of Jana del-CerroPhoto of Adelicia R. CliffePhoto of Nimrah Najeeb

On Monday, November 18, 2024, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS” or the “Committee”) announced that it had finalized the regulatory changes previewed in April that will enhance certain CFIUS procedures and sharpen its penalty and enforcement authorities.[1]  The changes go into effect on December 26, 2024 and as described in more detail below: (a) expand the types of information that CFIUS can require transaction parties and other persons (i.e., third-parties) submit when engaging with them on transactions that were not filed with CFIUS; (b) broaden the instances in which CFIUS may use its subpoena authority, including when seeking to obtain information from third persons not party to a transaction notified to CFIUS and in connection with assessing national security risk associated with non-notified transactions; and (c) substantially increase monetary penalties for violations of CFIUS regulations from a maximum of U.S. $250,000 to U.S. $5 million per violation, or the value of the transaction, whichever is greater.

Continue Reading CFIUS Finalizes Regulations to Increase Penalties, Expand Subpoena Authority, and Enhance Enforcement Authorities to Protect National Security
Photo of Jason CrawfordPhoto of Agustin D. OrozcoPhoto of William Tucker
Constitutionality of the Qui Tam Provisions

In this episode, Jason Crawford, Agustin Orozco, and Will Tucker discuss U.S. ex. rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates LLC, the recent decision in which a court found the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act to be unconstitutional. The hosts analyze the court’s reasoning and consider its potential impact on FCA cases. “Let’s Talk FCA” is Crowell & Moring’s podcast covering the latest developments with the False Claims Act.

ListenCrowell.com | PodBean | SoundCloud | Apple Podcasts 

Photo of Carina FedericoPhoto of Tyler A. O'ConnorPhoto of Aaron Cummings

Since its passage in 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act’s renewable energy tax credits have been in the crosshairs of Congressional Republicans. With many of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provisions expiring at the end of 2025, and a full plate of Trump and Congressional Republican Campaign promises for tax cuts in play, the Republicans have pointed to repeal of the IRA as a source of funding to pay for other tax breaks.

Continue Reading Clean Energy Tax Credits and After the Election – What to Expect?

The following is an installment in Crowell & Moring’s Bid Protest Sustain of the Month Series.  In this series, Crowell’s Government Contracts Practice will keep you up to date with a summary of the most notable bid protest sustain decision each month.  Below, Crowell Consultant Cherie Owen discusses Hometown Veterans Medical, LLC, B-422751; B-422751.2, Oct. 11, 2024, 2024 CPD ¶ 244, in which GAO sustained the protest of a company eliminated from a procurement on the basis of a non-substantive compliance check.

In Hometown, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was conducting a procurement for home oxygen services.  Among other things, the solicitation instructed offerors to complete certain SAM.gov certifications.  It also stated that failure to provide all of the documentation required by the solicitation would result in proposal rejection.  After receiving proposals, the VA first conducted a “compliance check” to determine whether each offeror had complied with all of the solicitation’s instructions.  Based on its compliance check the VA eliminated four of the eight proposals—including Hometown’s—as unacceptable.  Hometown protested its elimination, arguing that the non-compliance in its proposal was not substantive and that the compliance check constituted an unstated evaluation criterion. 

In responding to the protest, the VA distinguished between what it characterized as an “initial compliance review” of proposals (which resulted in the rejection of Hometown’s proposal), and evaluation (which had not yet occurred).  However, GAO firmly rejected this distinction, stating, “[w]e decline to adopt that distinction for purposes of our consideration of Hometown’s protest,” and citing FAR 15.305, which describes the assessment of an offeror’s proposal as an evaluation.  More importantly, GAO stressed that, no matter how the agency characterized its review, the VA’s rejection of proposals was not consistent with the RFP’s stated evaluation criteria.  In this regard, GAO noted that there was no language in the solicitation indicating that the VA would perform an “initial compliance review” as part of the evaluation. To the contrary, the solicitation identified only two evaluation factors: experience and price.  The requirement to submit copies of SAM.gov certifications did not fall under either of these evaluation criteria.  As a result, GAO sustained the protest, instructing the VA to either amend the solicitation to state the additional criteria on which it intended to evaluate proposals (including any initial compliance review), solicit revised proposals, and conduct a new evaluation or reevaluate all proposals consistent with GAO’s decision and the existing evaluation criteria.

In sustaining the protest, GAO stressed that the requirement to submit copies of offerors’ SAM.gov certifications was not explicit in the solicitation.  Therefore, the situation in Hometown was different from GAO’s decision in Futron, Inc., B-420703, July 25, 2022, 2022 CPD ¶ 189, where GAO found an agency had properly rejected a proposal for failure to submit similar copies of certifications.  In Futron, the solicitation had explicitly warned that “[f]ailure to complete the representations will deem the proposal ineligible for award”—a provision that Futron did not challenge prior to the solicitation’s closing date.

The Hometown decision provides an important reminder that regardless of whether an agency characterizes its assessment as a “compliance review” or an “evaluation,” agencies are required to evaluate proposals consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 

We would like to thank Cherie J. Owen, Consultant, for her contribution to this blog post.

Photo of Peter J. Eyre
New Administration & Tariffs

This week’s special edition focuses on what contractors can expect from the incoming administration in terms of tariffs, and is hosted by Peter Eyre and Alex Schaefer. Crowell & Moring’s “Fastest 5 Minutes” is a biweekly podcast that provides a brief summary of significant government contracts legal and regulatory developments that no government contracts lawyer or executive should be without.

ListenCrowell.com | PodBean | SoundCloud | Apple Podcasts