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
Michael H. Payne is a Partner and Chair of the Federal Construction Group at Cohen Seglias Pallas Greenhall & Furman PC. As Chair of the firm’s growing Government Contracting Group, Michael represents contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers on a wide range of federal contracting issues, including the interpretation of solicitation and contract provisions, the filing of bid protests, resolution of disputes, and the preparation of contract claims and the litigation of appeals. Michael has vast experience in federal government contracting, stemming from his time as Chief Trial Attorney for the North Atlantic Division of the Army Corps of Engineers, and is recognized in the federal construction contracting industry as an attorney who enjoys a good working relationship with government agencies.
Disputes frequently arise because the government refuses to agree that a contractor is entitled to additional money or time resulting from constructive changes, differing site conditions, government-caused delays, or countless other reasons. These disagreements typically are dealt with through the submission of Requests for Equitable Adjustment (REAs) or certified claims and are ultimately resolved through the disputes process. They focus on the rights of the parties under the specific terms of the contract. The problem, however, is that contractors also incur costs because of government indecisiveness that has not yet generated an REA or claim under a particular contract clause. This places the contractor in a state of limbo, not knowing whether there will be a significant impact to the project.
The Europe District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is hosting an Industry Day on August 15, 2018 in Tel Aviv. The event begins at 09:00 at The Ritz-Carlton Herzlia.
This conference will present an overview of upcoming construction projects in Israel and provide U.S. firms with an opportunity to meet potential Israeli subcontractors or suppliers.
Although these construction projects are performed in Israel, the law requires that the prime contracts must be awarded to U.S. firms and they, in turn, are permitted to subcontract up to 75% of the work to Israeli companies. Given the millions of dollars that have been obligated to the program, there are many opportunities for American and Israeli firms to work together. …
Earlier this month, my colleague, Michael Payne, and I attended Israel Industry Day sponsored by the Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) and the Israeli Ministry of Defense (“MOD”) in New York City. The purpose of the program was to present the Israel Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Construction Program and to introduce American and Israeli construction contractors and A/E firms to the upcoming construction opportunities in Israel. Information was provided on the general scope of USACE design build and design bid build projects within Israel; typical infrastructure and facilities being procured; potential repair, maintenance, and construction opportunities to support MOD facilities in Israel; as well as information on the solicitation and proposal process and various legal issues that apply to the Projects. …
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. …
Government contractors know that an unfavorable performance review posted to the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (“CPARS”) can be extremely costly. Many negotiated solicitations include past performance as an important or even primary evaluation factor for contract award. An unfavorable review on a past contract can impose significant costs on the contractor to address the unfavorable review with contracting officers on future solicitations. However, the contractor saddled with an unfair and inaccurate CPARS review may now have a means to challenge the review and recover some of these costs. …
The long-awaited Final Rule addressing changes to the SBA’s Mentor-Protégé program is being published in the Federal Register today. The Mentor-Protégé program that was limited to 8(a) Small Business Concerns has now been expanded and, effective August 24, 2016, will be available to Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses, HUBZones Small Businesses, and Women-Owned Small Businesses, as well as non-disadvantaged Small Business Concerns. The program is “designed to enhance the capabilities of protégé firms by requiring approved mentors to provide business development assistance to protégé firms and to improve the protégé firms’ ability to successfully compete for federal contracts.”
In its final rule published on May 31, 2016, the SBA modified the regulations relating to affiliation based on an “identity of interest” pursuant to 13 C.F.R. § 121.103(f). Specifically, the SBA provided clearer guidelines regarding identity of interest affiliation due to familial relationships and economic dependence.
Earlier this week, we blogged about a final rule issued on May 31 by the Small Business Administration (“SBA”), which made several major changes to the small business regulations. This new rule implements changes mandated by the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, (“NDAA”) and finalizes the proposed rule issued by the SBA back in December of 2014.