DFARS Case 2009-D031, Government Support Contractor Access to Technical Data, Interim rule
Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011
I would recommend all contractors discuss with their outside counsel the impact and potential risk to the security of their technical data this interim rule poses. If any contractor needs a recommendation for counsel with expertise in this subject matter feel free to contact me via email or at the following number 814-242-2410
Click here for a link to the Federal Registor for DFARS Case 2009-D031
Another example of the Idiocy call guidance to DCAA auditors
Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011
Below is one of the best examples of government double speak and CYA that I have seen in a long time. This statement allows DCAA to site the contractor for a system deficiency while also taking advantage of the cost saving when a contractor reduces it rates to be competitive.
DCAA Technical Advice
Recent advice for a DCAA Regional Technical Programs Specialist regarding a contractor’s decision not to invoice for the fully allowable indirect cost rates:
“The voluntary underbilling should be cited as a [system] “(b) … In establishing billing rates, the contracting officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) or auditor should ensure that the billing rates are as close as possible to the final indirect cost rates anticipated for the contractor’s fiscal period, as adjusted for any unallowable costs.” (Emphasis added) If a contractor does not anticipate invoicing the fully allowable amount, the contractor’s actions would not violate the wording of the provision. deficiency.”
DoD scales back plan to restrict payments to some contractors
Saturday, December 18th, 2010
Under a barrage of contractor criticism, the Defense Department has softened a plan to hold back contract payments as a way to prod companies to fix problems in their accounting and other business systems.
In a proposed rule released in January, DoD had sought authority to withhold 10 percent of payments if a particular business system was found to be deficient. Under a new proposal published this month in the Federal Register, that amount is cut to 5 percent and for small businesses would be limited to 2 percent. If a deficiency is considered high risk, the maximum that could withheld would be capped at 20 percent, down from 100 percent in the original proposal. And in response to complaints that the original draft was overly subjective, officials spell out compliance criteria more clearly.
In general, the revised proposal does a “much better job of laying out the attributes of each of these business systems” and then linking enforcement to compliance with those attributes, said Alan Chvotkin, executive vice president and counsel at the Professional Services Council, a contractor trade group. While not ready to give the revision a passing grade without more study, “I liked what I saw,” Chvotkin said.
But Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, viewed the new proposal as “a giant step backward” for contractor accountability. And because DoD is issuing a second proposed rule, another year may pass before contracting officers get the authority to withhold payments, said Amey, who had wanted the Pentagon to make its original draft more stringent.
Click this link for a copy of the Federal Times Article
