Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Expulsion of an LLC Member

“Change the changeable, accept the unchangeable, and remove yourself from the unacceptable.” —Denis Waitley It’s hard to argue with this advice from Mr. Waitley, a Naval Aviator turned business consultant and motivational speaker. When faced with an LLC member or members that have become toxic, disagreeable or just plain useless, converting Waitley’s advice into action is essential. First, Identify the Problem Defining the problem presented by your fellow LLC member(s) is the first step, and cannot be overlooked. Often

Incomplete Novation = No Direct Economic Interest

Government contracting law firm

Parties with an unapproved novation agreement aren’t eligible to protest agency award decisions. The GAO found that under the bid protest provisions of the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 only an “interested party” may protest a federal procurement. The protester must be an actual or prospective offeror to have a direct economic interest in the award of a contract. In the Matter of: Wyle Laboratories, Inc., File:  B-416528, dated September 7, 2018 the GAO held Wyle did not

Forest fires and Task orders exceeding the scope of the original IDIQ

When Task Orders Exceed Your Contract This bid protest, filed by Western Pilot Service (WPS) and three other contractors, protested the BLM’s issuance of a task order, which in the view of the protester exceeded the scope of the original IDIQ, and was therefore illegal. The back story to this protest is that the BLM originally issued to solicitations; one for on-call aircraft services for forest fire suppression and another solicitation for 100 day exclusive use aircraft services for the same

Decision Two: Sovereign Acts, Agency Deference and Contract Disputes

A second key government contract case decided in 2017 involved court agency deference to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations. The case decided a subcontractor’s Request for an Equitable Adjustment (REA) springing from what the subcontractor argued was a change in government regulation and policy. The case, Garco Construction Inc. v. Secretary of the Army (ASBCA 57796,15-1 BCA ¶ 36,135, motion for recon. denied, 16-1 BCA ¶ 36,278, aff’d, Garco Constr., Inc. v. Sec’y of the Army, 856 F.3d 938 (2017), petition

Six Important 2017 Government Contracting Decisions

The next six newsletters will contain articles regarding important government contracting decisions from 2017. The articles will include a review of the following: Technology Systems, Inc., ASBCA No. 59577, 17-1 BCA ¶ 36,631 (the DCAA disallowed expenses following an audit); Garco Construction, Inc. v. Secretary of the Army, 856 F. 3d 938 (Fed Cir 2017) (involving access to a military facility where the contract was to be performed); United States ex rel. Harman v. Trinity Industries, Inc., 872 F.3d 645 (5th

2017 Decision 1: DCAA Audits – Unapproved Subs and Unallowable Costs

Many clients have Department of Defense contracts and are subject to Defense Contracting Auditing Agency (DCAA) audits of incurred costs in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, “Allowable Cost and Payment.” An important 2017, 61-page decision by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) addressed the following major government contracting issues: Overhead rates and supporting documentation; DCAA’s ability to change positions before the six-year statute of limitations expires; Depreciation; Bonuses; Accrued Costs crossing fiscal years; and, Unapproved subcontractor costs. The case was

The Rule of Two

Set Up an Appointment with one of our Attorneys It has been a little over a year now since the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1969 (2016). We discussed the case here. In that case, the court held requirements and procedures in the Veterans Benefits Act of 2006 (“VBA”), 38 U.S.C. § 8127 were mandatory. The purpose of the VBA was to set annual goals for contracting with service-disabled and

Servicemembers Returning to Work: Know Your USERRA Rights

Congress has enacted many laws and statutes that protect servicemembers rights including rights related to employment. It is simply unacceptable to serve your country and then come back from duty and have no job. To remedy that problem, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (“USERRA”), 38 U.S.C. § 4301 et seq., which requires employers to reemploy service members in civilian jobs when these individuals return from a period of duty. Who is Protected? USERRA applies

Could Your Business Survive Debarment from Government Contracts?

Set Up an Appointment with one of our Attorneys Suspensions, Proposed Debarments and Debarments are used by agencies to protect themselves from irresponsible contractors. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 9.4 directs agencies to solicit offers, award contracts and consent to subcontracts only with responsible contractors.  The process for suspension and debarment is left to agency discretion.  The rule results from the efforts of the Office of Management and Budget to combat waste, fraud and abuse in the 1980s.  Suspension and debarment used

Size Matters-Ostensible Subcontractor Rule

For help with a size standard protest ,Contact us The Air Force issued an RFP for Linguist and Support Services (LASS) on November 30, 2016, in support of intel operations.  The procurement was an 8(a) set-aside.  The size standard for the NAICS in question was 7.5 million.  The contract required the awardee to perform all phases of collecting, interpreting, translating, and performing analysis of mission data. The contractor shall provide support as language mentors and trainers. The contractor shall