The FAR Councils are taking their first major steps toward reducing the federal government’s energy usage. The interim rule published on May 26, 2011 [pdf] requires that 95% of all future government acquisitions be “sustainable.” It implements Executive Order 13423 (Jan. 24, 2007) [pdf] and Executive Order 13514 (Oct. 5, 2009) [pdf], which require that federal agencies improve their energy efficiency and leverage their buying power to create a market for sustainable goods and services. The rule changes the FAR in some significant ways, most of which are likely to affect contractors.
“Postal Reform Act” would also reform USPS contracting
Saving the Postal Service also requires reforming its contracting policies, according to a bill introduced by Rep. Issa (R-Calif.) on June 23, 2011. Prompted by the Postal Service’s decision to stop paying into the federal retirement system and $27 billion in projected losses over three years, the bill would enact sweeping reforms. The “Postal Reform Act of 2011” would create two separate oversight bodies that would have broad, receivership-type authority to impose cost-cutting measures on the agency. While curing postal deficits is the primary goal, the bill specifically addresses postal procurement practices and would impact postal contracting in significant ways. Read on for the details.
Contractor political contributions as a factor in contract award decisions
Should the federal government require prospective government contractors to disclose their political contributions? The Obama administration weighed in on this issue in April with a draft executive order entitled “Disclosure of Political Spending by Government Contractors.” As the title suggests, the draft order would require a contractor submitting an offer to perform a federal contract to disclose political contributions exceeding $5,000 made within two years preceding the offer. The order has generated significant controversy. Many have expressed fear that the information would be used inappropriately as a new factor in awarding federal contracts. The controversy intensified last month when Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) and Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) proposed the Keeping Politics Out of Federal Contracting Act of 2011, which would prohibit the disclosures called for in the draft executive order.
Withholding payment for deficiencies in contractor business systems
An interim rule published by the Department of Defense authorizes DoD contracting officers to withhold payment from contractors whose business systems they deem deficient. Issued on May 18, 2011, the rule implements Section 893 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act of 2011, which we discuss here. It authorizes COs to withhold up to ten percent of progress payments if the CO determines that the contractor’s business systems contain significant deficiencies. The new rule applies to solicitations issued on or after May 18, 2011. COs are encouraged to amend existing solicitations with the new requirements “to the extent feasible.”
Executive compensation FAQ
Contractors seeking to comply with the new requirement to report the compensation of their five highest paid executives under FAR 52.204-10 (July 2010) still have a lot of unresolved questions. We heard some of the questions during our June 8, 2011 webinar on the topic, which was sponsored by L2 Federal Resources, LLC, publisher of The Contracting Post. Thanks for hosting!
Here are some of the questions posed, along with our answers.
Drawing the line on FAPIIS
Efforts to increase transparency in federal contracting are well underway. But it’s still not clear exactly how much contractor information will be made public under the new rules, or how they will be interpreted in light of existing laws. We know that FAPIIS is now online and accessible to the public, for example, but that…
OFCCP’s newly proposed Scheduling Letter
The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs is proposing changes to the standard-form Scheduling Letter that will impose significant new burdens on contractors. The proposed changes would require contractors to provide their leave policies (including their entire employee handbook), more detailed demographic and compensation data, as well as the last three years of VETS-100/VETS-100A reports.…
Will $13 million bribery scandal lead the Postal Service to reissue its procurement regulations?
Did the U.S. Postal Service’s lack of procurement regulations inadvertently help USPS officials carry out a $13 million bribery scheme over several years? Five Postal Service employees were indicted in May 2011 by a Detroit, MI grand jury for taking bribes and steering as much as $13 million in vehicle maintenance work to a private contractor. Could this scheme have been prevented, or caught earlier, if USPS had not abolished its procurement regulations in 2006?
Will the 3% contractor withholding tax ever go into effect?
Contributed by Husch Blackwell Partner Bert Wolf, Esq.
Government contractors are relieved that they won’t immediately face having 3% of their invoices withheld as an advance against future tax liability. The IRS’s final rule implementing the 3% withholding tax won’t go into effect until 2013. Absent a material modification, contracts executed by December 31, 2012 will be exempt from the withholding tax entirely, at least until January 1, 2014. But that isn’t the end of the story. Here is a bit of the background on the source of the 3% withholding tax, why it has been delayed, and some thoughts on why it’s not a great solution to the problem at hand.
United Space Alliance’s temporary agreement with OFCCP
Developments in the OFCCP’s investigation of compensation disparities at United Space Alliance, LLC are worthy of consideration. During a 2009 desk audit, OFCCP conducted a standard threshold test of United Space Alliance’s compensation data. Although this audit uncovered no indicators of pay discrimination, OFCCP conducted additional tests of the data, commonly known as the “pattern analysis” and the “30 and 5 Refinement” tests. These tests revealed potential pay bias, and OFCCP requested more extensive compensation data to examine the question more closely. The case begins when United Space Alliance refused to comply with OFCCP’s request.