Expedited Contract Closeouts – A Fast Track Available to Select Older Contracts
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.28.19
On April 30, 2019, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a final rule, effective immediately, amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to permit expedited closeout of certain contracts (or groups of contracts) through modification of such contracts without completing a reconciliation audit or other corrective action. The new provision—which implements section 836 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 and section 824 of the NDAA for FY 2018—applies when: (1) the contract was entered into on a date that is at least 17 fiscal years before the current fiscal year; (2) there are no further supplies or services due under the contract; and (3) a determination has been made that the contract records are not otherwise reconcilable because either (a) the contract or related payments records have been destroyed or lost, or (b) the time and effort required to establish the exact amount owed is disproportionate to the amount at issue. To accomplish closeout of such contracts, the final rule permits negotiated settlements with the contractor and remaining contract balances to be offset with balances within the contract or on other contracts irrespective of the year, the type of appropriation obligated to fund each contract or contract line item, and regardless of whether the appropriation has closed.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
