Photo of Casey J. McKinnon

Casey J. McKinnon focuses his practice on government contracts and litigation, representing clients in all stages of litigation related to federal contracting, including case strategy, discovery, trials, and appeals. He counsels clients throughout the procurement process including solicitation review, proposal preparation, and pre and post-award bid protests. Casey also assists with day-to-day contracting issues including drafting, reviewing, and negotiating contracts and other matters of contract administration.

Casey is also a member of the firm’s Commercial Litigation Group. His experience spans all aspects of commercial litigation, including discovery, motions practice, oral arguments, and trials. He has litigated cases in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia on a range of issues, with a focus on contract disputes.  Casey also has appellate experience and has presented arguments before the Virginia Supreme Court.

The Buy American Act includes a preference for “domestic end products” and “domestic construction materials” on federal projects absent a waiver. Prior to recent revisions, domestic end products and domestic construction materials were those that were: 1) manufactured in the U.S.; and 2) made up of at least 50% domestic components or, alternatively, were Commercially Available Off-The-Shelf (COTS) items.

The FAR Council recently issued a final rule that makes substantial changes to the FAR’s Buy American requirements (FAR 52.225-1, 52.225-3, 52.225-9 and 52.225-11) in accordance with Executive Order 13881, “Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products, and Materials.” The revised FAR clauses became effective January 21, 2021, and are to be inserted in all new contracts beginning February 22, 2021. The final rule made three key changes to the FAR’s Buy American requirements:
Continue Reading Important Changes to the Buy American Act – Key Updates for Contractors

Late last year, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a lengthy final rule that made changes to various SBA regulations. While the SBA highlighted its changes to the Mentor-Protégé program, the rule will have wide-ranging impacts on small business contracting, including the treatment of a small business offeror’s capabilities, past performance, and experience.

Prior to the issuance of the SBA’s new rule, FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) stated that an agency “should” consider the past performance of key subcontractors, but the use of “should” left agencies with broad discretion to consider (or not consider) subcontractor past performance. In many cases, agencies still issued solicitations that explicitly precluded consideration of subcontractor experience. Such limitations prevented small business offerors from using key subcontractors or a teaming arrangement to establish the required experience and past performance.
Continue Reading SBA Changes Ensure Small Businesses Can Utilize Teaming Arrangements and Subcontractor Experience

As the economic crisis caused by COVID-19 evolves and worsens, there are many novel questions that government contractors and government agencies face. Certain FAR clauses that limit a contractor’s right to recover damages need to be revisited, including the clause entitled “Default (Fixed-Price Construction)” found at FAR 52.249-10. Under this clause, delay resulting from an Act of God, such as an epidemic, is excusable, but it is also non-compensable. This holds out the very real possibility of significant financial harm to construction contractors and seems to run counter to the government’s objective of preserving companies so that there will be an economic recovery once the crisis is over.

Currently, Department of Defense agencies are making every effort to treat projects as essential to the national defense and contractors are permitted, and in some cases directed, to continue performance. Since the government wants projects to continue, and government contractors want to keep working, there appears to be a commonality of interest. Contractor employees, however, are increasingly concerned about their personal health and safety and, in some cases, are refusing to report for work. This is compounded by the Permits and Responsibilities clause (FAR 52.236.7), which requires contractors to comply with “State, and municipal laws, codes, and regulations applicable to the performance of the work.” Accordingly, even though the federal government requires work to continue, state and local governments may be requiring people to maintain social distancing and stay at home. Even if exemptions are granted for government contractors working on essential projects, that does not lessen the legitimate concern of workers who are fearful of health risks.
Continue Reading Delays Resulting From Coronavirus May Be Both Excusable and Compensable

The coronavirus crisis has made life difficult for Americans on both a personal and work-related level. While concern about personal health is paramount, the health of the economy cannot be ignored. The recently enacted stimulus package brings vital short-term relief, but the long-term health of the economy will be driven by how quickly people can get back to work.

The construction industry has, in some cases, been exempted from “stay at home” rules because construction projects are frequently regarded as essential activities. That being said, many state and local projects are being delayed as reported by the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) as shown on its excellent interactive map. In federal construction, however, the government seems to be doing its best to keep projects moving, although that could become impossible if the pandemic worsens.
Continue Reading Virtual Counsel for Federal Construction Contractors Impacted by the Coronavirus Pandemic

The coronavirus epidemic has disrupted our world in ways we could not have imagined a few weeks ago. In the midst of the crisis, the federal government is trying to do everything possible to keep businesses afloat, and that includes the continuation of current federal projects. We recently published a blog post addressing steps contractors should consider in order to protect their rights under contracts they are currently performing, but there is also a question about whether contractors should bid new projects. That is the focus of this article.

Almost all federal construction and supply contracts are solicited on a firm fixed-price basis. This type of contract is designed to provide the greatest opportunity for reward, coupled with the attendant risk of bidding incorrectly and incurring additional costs. The cost estimates that contractors must prepare before submitting a bid or proposal require a reasonable degree of foreseeability and certainty in the marketplace. In times of significant inflation or a shortage of resources as occurred during the energy crisis of the 1970s, it is difficult to predict the cost of materials for the life of a project. What we now face is far more disruptive. We are in the midst of a pandemic that is making it impossible to predict the availability, at any price, of labor, equipment, and materials in the weeks and months ahead. Predicting prices under those circumstances has nothing to do with sound business judgment – it requires a crystal ball.
Continue Reading Bidding Federal Work During the Coronavirus Crisis

We are navigating in uncharted waters when it comes to the effect of coronavirus on federal contracting. There have been economic crises before—The Great Depression of 1929-1939, the oil crises of 1973 and 1979, Black Monday in 1987, the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007-2010, the ongoing European sovereign debt crisis, among many others. Even as far back as AD 33, there was a financial panic that was the result of the mass issuance of unsecured loans by Roman banking houses. What these economic disasters all have in common is that not one of them was the result of a virus outbreak. On the contrary, they all resulted from economic chaos brought about by poor financial policy, over-spending, and greed.

The current pandemic is affecting our lives and the lives of everyone in the world in ways that we did not and could not predict. There is no doubt that life will return to normal one day, but we do not know when. We also do not yet know how severe the impact will be on our economy. The federal government is discussing the payment of hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts for businesses and direct payments to American citizens. This is happening in what is just the first week of what almost amounts to a national quarantine that is effectively requiring almost everyone to stay at home and practice “social distancing.” The President recently stated that this situation could last until July or August. If this is the case, it will have a crippling effect on the personal health of many people and the economic health of almost everyone.
Continue Reading A Government Contractor’s Roadmap for Navigating the Coronavirus Pandemic

In a recent opinion issued by the United States Court of Federal Claims, Meridian Engineering Company vs. The United States, a case argued by our firm, the Court ruled that a contract modification containing a release did not prevent the contractor from recovering further damages. The dispute involved a contract between Meridian and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for a flood-control project in Nogales, AZ. After entering into the contract, the Contracting Officer issued two contract modifications that compensated Meridian for government-caused delays related to an access ramp and surveys. As a result of the underlying delays, Meridian’s work was pushed into the yearly rainy season in southern Arizona, referred to as the “monsoon” season, and completion of the critical channel invert work was impacted by numerous flood events. Had it not been for the earlier access ramp and survey delays, the work would have been completed before the onset of the “monsoon” season.

Continue Reading When a Final Release is Not “Final”

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

Effective May 25, 2018, the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) amended its regulations regarding a contractor’s size and/or socio-economic status following a novation, merger, or acquisition. Specifically, through a “technical correction,” the SBA revised its regulations to dictate that when a company becomes “other than small” or no longer has a certain socio-economic status (veteran-owned, woman-owned, HUBZone, etc.) as a result of a novation, merger, or acquisition, the business is no longer eligible to compete for set-aside task orders on multiple-award contracts held by the company. This change in eligibility is applicable even where the contracting officer does not specifically request a recertification. 
Continue Reading Contractor Beware: SBA Expands Impact of Novation, Merger, or Acquisition on Size and Socio-Economic Status

Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. v. United States provides hope to contractors that incur higher than anticipated costs on a requirements contract or, alternatively, on construction contracts where line item prices are based on estimated quantities. 
Continue Reading Federal Circuit Clarifies Requirements for Government-Furnished Estimated Quantities