On November 4, 2021, the Department of Defense (DOD) announced it is revamping the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification program. The changes are intended to make the program more streamlined and flexible, which, in turn, will make it easier (and cheaper) for contractors to implement. Details of the revised program are limited, but some of the highlights include:

  • Fewer Levels: CMMC 2.0 will have only three levels of certification rather than five, and they will align more closely with existing cybersecurity standards. For example, Level 2 will align with NIST SP 800-171, the standard that applies when contractors handle controlled unclassified information.

Continue Reading DOD Announces CMMC 2.0; Cancels Rollout of CMMC 1.0

The Biden administration seems to be doubling down on the application and enforcement of the Buy American Act with the president’s January 25 executive order. While former President Trump’s order focused on increasing domestic material percentages, President Biden’s order focuses on oversight, enforcement, and access to information.

The first part of President Biden’s order establishes a Made in America Office (MAO) to increase oversight of Buy America and Buy American waivers. Buy America gives preference to the use of domestic materials on federal contracts that relate to transportation, and Buy American generally requires the use of domestic construction materials on any federal construction project. MAO will oversee both Buy America and Buy American and will be responsible for several new changes, including:
Continue Reading Biden’s Buy American: More Oversight and More Information

On November 27, 2018, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) announced that it will consolidate the GSA’s 24 Multiple Award Schedules (MAS) into a single schedule for products and services. The GSA stated that the changes were intended to “modernize federal acquisition” and “make the government buying and selling experience easy, efficient, and modern.”

Through the MAS, also referred to as the GSA Schedules and Federal Supply Schedules, the GSA establishes long-term, government-wide contracts with commercial firms. Approximately $31 billion is spent through MAS each year on a wide variety of supplies and services. Prior to the announced changes, the GSA maintained 24 separate MAS organized by industry or service ranging from IT Procurement (Schedule 70) to Sports Equipment, Signs and Trophies (Schedule 78). Under that preexisting framework, a vendor selling a variety of supplies and/or services to the government was often required to participate in multiple schedules that each included their own terms and conditions. As a result of the announced changes, and the corresponding consolidation of all MAS into a single schedule, all contractors will be able to sell their products and services through a single program with a uniform set of terms and conditions.Continue Reading GSA Announces Consolidation of Multiple Award Schedules

A bid protest must allege a violation of a procurement statute or regulation. Although most protests challenge the award or proposed award of a contract, the GAO will also consider protests involving defective solicitations and other unreasonable agency actions like the cancellation of a solicitation. In certain cases, the GAO will consider protests involving the termination of a contract where the protest alleges that the government’s termination was based upon improprieties associated with the contract award (this is sometimes called a “reverse protest”). Additionally, the GAO will consider protests concerning (1) awards of subcontracts by or for a Federal agency, (2) sales by a Federal agency, or (3) procurement actions by government entities that do not fall within the strict definition of Federal agencies, if the agency or entity involved has agreed in writing to allow the GAO to decide the dispute.
Continue Reading The GAO Reaffirms That a Bid Protest Must Allege a Violation of a Procurement Statute or Regulation

The Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) finalized new regulations, effective October 1, 2018, that govern eligibility to obtain contracts that are set aside for veteran-owned small business and service-disabled veteran-owned small business (collectively, “(SD)VOSB”). The regulatory changes are intended to improve coordination between the VA’s “Vets First” program, which covers (SD)VOSB set-asides issued by the VA, and the SBA’s program, which covers (SD)VOSB set-asides issued by all other government agencies.
Continue Reading SBA and VA Publish Final Revisions to Regulations That Govern Set-Asides for VOSBs and SDVOSBs

As I mentioned in a recent post, the Department of Defense (DoD) is using its “other transaction” authority with increased frequency to attract non-traditional defense contractors and to capitalize on the cutting-edge technological advancements found in the commercial marketplace. Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs) are not procurement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements and, as such, many procurement laws and regulations do not apply, including the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). 
Continue Reading Bid Protests: Are Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs) Really Bulletproof?

If you gave me $17 million on the credit card, I could call Cabela’s tonight and outfit every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine, and I’d get a discount on it for a bulk buy. This is a pistol. The technology’s been around for five centuries, and arguably it’s the least important weapons system in the Department of Defense inventory.[1]

Senior leaders within the Department of Defense (DoD) have grown increasingly frustrated with an acquisition system characterized by ever-increasing costs and significant delays in getting end items to customers. Their frustration has been heard by Congress and has resulted in recent Congressional action. The latest major acquisition reform effort started with the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with each subsequent NDAA containing various provisions that are meant to modernize and accelerate the antiquated and cumbersome federal acquisition system providing flexibility and allowing for the agile acquisition of next-generation technology.
Continue Reading The Future of Acquisition in the Federal Government: Innovation and Rapid Procurement Through Other Transaction Authorities and Other Transaction Agreements

Hand with megaphoneHello from Nashville, Tennessee! I’m currently at the National 8(a) Association’s Winter Conference and had the privilege of participating in a great panel discussion with some of the leading small business scholars and practitioners in the country. It was truly a great experience. Since I’m here and it’s fresh on my mind, I thought I’d share something that all SDVOSBs should know: Your world is about to change.
Continue Reading National 8(a) Winter Conference – Changes Coming for SDVOSBs

The National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) for Fiscal Year 2018 includes enhanced post-award debriefing requirements for the Department of Defense (“DoD”). This change is likely a response to the Office of Federal Procurement Policy’s (“OFPP”) January 5, 2017 memorandum. The memorandum debunked certain misconceptions about the debriefing process and encouraged agencies to adopt best practices and maximize the value of debriefings. One such myth that the OFPP’s memorandum debunked was that debriefings always lead to protests. The memorandum advocated for more transparency in the debriefing process, explaining that, in fact, an effective debriefing process can greatly reduce the frequency of protests.
Continue Reading Good News for Department of Defense Contractors: Enhanced Post-Award Debriefing Requirements are on Their Way!

This article originally appeared in The Legal Intelligencer on January 02, 2018

On Nov. 29, 2017, U.S. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced a revised Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Corporate Enforcement Policy. The new policy contains a clear roadmap for avoiding corporate criminal liability that corporate counsel would be wise to follow.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, 15 U.S.C. Section 78dd-1 et seq. (FCPA) makes it unlawful for an “issuer” or “domestic concern” defined by the act to make payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business.
Continue Reading What In-House Counsel Must Know About the Revised Corporate Enforcement Policy