1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Final Rule Requires Technical Interchange for IR&D Cost Allowability

Final Rule Requires Technical Interchange for IR&D Cost Allowability

Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.14.16

On November 4, 2016, DoD issued a final rule requiring contractors performing IR&D projects initiated in FY2017 or later to engage in a technical interchange with DoD, and report the occurrence of this interchange, before the costs for such projects may be deemed allowable (a topic previously discussed here). Although the rule is stated to be intended to promote DoD awareness of IR&D projects and provide feedback to contractors, it is likely to impose an administrative burden on contractors and DoD alike and could have a chilling effect on IR&D investment, particularly because it is silent regarding the allowability of IR&D costs if DoD fails to engage.

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].”...