1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Government Charged With Knowledge of Unapproved Subcontractors Listed on Invoices

Government Charged With Knowledge of Unapproved Subcontractors Listed on Invoices

Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.02.19

In URS Federal Services, Inc. (Sept. 3, 2019), the ASBCA found on summary judgment that the government’s 2017 claim to recover $698,685 in allegedly unallowable direct subcontractor costs was time-barred by the CDA’s six-year statute of limitations because the claim accrued in 2006, when the government paid URS’s invoices that included those costs. In arguing that it could only have “known” about the basis of its claim in 2012 when URS resubmitted its final indirect cost rate proposal for FY 2006, the government alleged that URS: (1) failed to receive contractual approval to subcontract, and (2) lacked adequate documentation (now) demonstrating that the costs at issue were incurred and allocable to the contract. Regarding the first basis, the Board found that the invoices listing the allegedly unapproved subcontractors demonstrated the government had knowledge that URS was using them when the government paid the invoices. The Board declined to grant summary judgment on the documentation issue. 

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26

Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right: GAO Sustains Protest Where Agency Tried to Fix PIA Violation with a Second PIA Violation

Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”...