On June 29, 2023, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its second report[1] on Department of Defense (DoD) artificial intelligence (AI) acquisition efforts. This latest report examines the DoD’s lack of formal AI acquisition guidance and identifies key principles from the private sector that can be applied to the DoD’s AI acquisition efforts.
Although
On June 23, 2023, a coalition of companies, including venture capital firms like Kleiner Perkins, General Catalyst and Founders Fund, and start-up defense technology companies, published an open letter to the Department of Defense (DoD), addressed to Secretary Lloyd J. Austin, petitioning DoD to consider procurement reform to help “overcome barriers to innovation.” The group asserts these barriers create “antiquated methods for developing requirements and selecting technologies that have drastically limited” DoD’s access to “the best commercial innovation.” In particular, the coalition endorsed adopting four recommendations pulled from a report by The Atlantic Council, a non-partisan international affairs think tank.
First, the letter suggests that DoD modernize to align with the 21stcentury industrial base. The letter acknowledges that DoD has already taken a strong step in this direction by establishing the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), which reports directly to Secretary Austin and whose mission is to accelerate the adoption of commercial technology. The coalition also encouraged DoD to provide DIU with additional staffing and resources to tap into the non-traditional defense industrial base, reinforce “buy before build” commercial practices, and help DoD speed up validation and approval of needs and funding.
This week’s episode covers resolution of False Claims Act allegations relating to alleged payments in violation of the Anti-Kickback Act, cessation of certain emergency contracting measures deployed early in the COVID-19 pandemic, and DoD Instruction 8310.01 relating to DoD IT, and is hosted by Peter Eyre and Yuan Zhou. Crowell & Moring’s “Fastest 5 Minutes”
On April 18, 2023, the Department of Defense (“DoD”) issued guidance to DoD contracting officers directing the cessation of certain emergency contracting measures utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic. Following the termination of the COVID-19 national emergency declaration through President Biden’s April 10, 2023 signing of H.J. Res. 7, DoD released a memorandum titled “
In Triple Canopy, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 61415, et al. (March 23, 2023), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) resolved a long-running dispute in favor of the contractor over reimbursement of fees imposed by the Afghan government on large security firms operating in the country. The ASBCA found the fees were akin to after-imposed taxes, reimbursable by the U.S. government, and not penalties for illegal conduct.
Triple Canopy had six fixed-price contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to provide private security services to military bases in Afghanistan. These contracts, awarded between March 2009 and September 2010, required Triple Canopy to comply with local laws. The contracts also included FAR 52.229-6, Taxes-Foreign Fixed Price Contracts, which states that the contract price shall be increased by the amount of any after-imposed tax the contractor is required to pay. In March 2011, the Afghan government issued a directive limiting the number of employees of any private security company to 500, imposing a fee for each employee over the cap. Triple Canopy was assessed a fee in March 2011, with the right to appeal, and that same month, the DoD issued a memo to the Afghan government requesting that Triple Canopy be exempted from the 500-employee limit. Triple Canopy appealed the assessment, which the Afghan government reduced, and Triple Canopy paid the reduced amount in July 2011. Triple Canopy submitted claims to the Contracting Officer (CO) for reimbursement of the fees, and then appealed to the ASBCA on the basis of the CO’s deemed denials. The ASBCA initially found Triple Canopy’s claims were barred by the Contract Dispute Act’s six-year statute of limitations and denied the appeals, which the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded in Triple Canopy, Inc. v. Sec’y of Air Force, 14 F.4th 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2021).
Continue Reading Third Time’s A Charm: Government Must Reimburse Triple Canopy for Afghan Taxes
On March 22, 2023, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to allow a procuring contracting officer (PCO) to delegate the authority to the contract administration office (CAO) to negotiate and settle direct costs questioned in an indirect cost rate proposal audit. After the delegation
On March 22, 2023, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a proposed rule that would amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to require certain contractors to provide export authorizations to the Defense Authorization Management Agency (DCMA).
DCMA performs quality assurance reviews for manufacturing operations to ensure contractors have the appropriate systems in place to meet quality and functionality standards along with contractual requirements regarding testing and validation. In some cases, DCMA will engage a foreign auditor to perform the quality assurance review. However, to do so DCMA needs insight into applicable export authorizations to see if engaging the foreign auditor is permissible.
The proposed rule would require contractors to provide export authorizations to DCMA when the contract requires (i) government quality assurance surveillance oversight and (ii) performance in or delivery to a government quality assurance country (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and the United Kingdom). Export authorizations include export licenses, exemptions, exceptions, and other approvals. The contractor must also provide the contact information for an empowered official or export point of contact.
Continue Reading Proposed Rule Requires Certain Contractors to Provide Export Authorizations to DCMA
On March 22, 2022, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a final rule requiring contracting officers to consider supplier risk assessments in DoD’s Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) when evaluating offers. SPRS is a DoD enterprise system that collects contractor quality and delivery performance data from a variety of systems to develop three risk assessments:
On December 19, 2022, DoD issued a DFARS proposed rule that seeks to (1) implement the data-rights portions of the May 2, 2019 Small Business Innovation Research Program and Small Business Technology Transfer Program Policy Directive (SBIR/STTR Policy Directive), and (2) impose significant changes to technical data and computer software marking requirements. The SBIR/STTR portion of the proposed rule follows DoD’s advance notice of proposed rulemaking issued on August 31, 2020 (see 85 FR 53758) and incorporates the eight written public comments that DoD received. The proposed changes to marking requirements go beyond the SBIR/STTR Policy Directive and respond to the Federal Circuit’s decision in The Boeing Co. v. Secretary of the Air Force, 983 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
On December 23, 2022, the Department of Defense (“DoD”), General Services Administration (“GSA”), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”) extended the comment period on the proposed rule, “Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate-Related Financial Risk,” from January 13, 2023 to February 13, 2023. As we summarized previously, the proposed rule would, if