Topic Archives: Acquisition Regulations

Federal Procurement

NEW YEAR, NEW DOMESTIC PREFERENCE RESTRICTIONS: TRUMP FINAL RULE AND BIDEN EXECUTIVE ORDER

Despite their many differences, Presidents Trump and Biden agree on one thing: that the Government should favor American manufacturers over foreign companies by tightening the protectionist restrictions applicable to many Federal procurements. The outgoing and incoming Administrations each took actions this January that will cheer the hearts of many American manufacturers, while dismaying advocates of ...›

January 5, 2021Acquisition Regulations

MoFo Law Clerk Co-Authors Contract Management Article on Sustainable Procurement

MoFo law clerk Markus Speidel co-wrote an article for National Contract Management Association’s Contract Management magazine with George Washington University Law School Professor Steven Schooner. The article, titled “‘Warming Up’ to Sustainable Procurement,” discusses how the procurement community can address climate change via sustainable procurement. The authors pose that government action is required to combat ...›

October 16, 2020Acquisition Regulations, Defense

New DCMA Defective Pricing Pilot Team Will Possess Audit Resolution Authority

The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) will institute a new Defective Pricing Pilot Team, according to a September 30, 2020, memo issued by Kim Herrington, Acting Principal Director of Defense Pricing and Contracting at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense.  The DCMA Defective Pricing Pilot Team will assist Government Procuring Contract Officers (PCOs) ...›

Federal Procurement

Proposed Rule to Amend the Far’s Implementation of the Buy American Act

Earlier this week, the FAR Council issued a proposed rule to implement President Trump’s Executive Order 13881. The Executive Order called for the expansion of the preference for domestic goods, products, and materials – particularly domestic iron and steel – in Federal procurements. If the rule is finalized, it will amend the FAR’s implementation of ...›

Try, Try Again

A recent defective pricing case, Alloy Surfaces Co., ASBCA No. 59625, 2020 WL 1896784, April 9, 2020, charmingly illustrates the Government’s doggedness in trying to reprice a contract using the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA).  The Armed Services Board of Contracting Appeals did not buy into any of the Government’s arguments, finding that an undisclosed ...›

The Basics of Undefinitized Contractual Actions (UCAs)

The federal contracting process is famous for its exacting approach to competitive procurement, which safeguards taxpayer funds and principles of fairness.  This emphasis on process, however, can slow the wheels of the acquisition machine.  The rapid spread of COVID-19, however, has required the government to use available tools to accelerate cash flow to contractors and ...›

Federal Procurement

President Issues New Domestic Preference Executive Order

The President has issued the third in a series of executive orders (EOs) directed at tightening domestic-preference restrictions in Government procurements covered by the Buy American Act (BAA).  EO 13881 orders the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) within 180 days to “consider proposing” a rule with the following features: (i) an amendment to the ...›

Federal Procurement

GAO Sharpening its Blade [Strategies] on OTA Review

The Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Blade Strategies, LLC, B-416752, 2018 WL 4584111 (Comp. Gen. Sept. 24, 2018), clarifies the GAO’s jurisdiction and standard of review for protests of other transaction agreements (OTAs), and also serves as a good reminder that all protests challenging an aspect of an agency’s solicitation — including the ...›