Insights

As the United States government transitions from the Biden Administration to the Trump Administration, significant changes are already impacting infrastructure policy, with likely consequences to both planned and in-progress infrastructure projects around the country. Disruptions in funding and other policy changes are creating uncertainty for investors and stakeholders involved in infrastructure projects, particularly the potential impacts on projects funded under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, as previewed in our January 18thclient alert, “Implications of Incoming Administration Changes to Infrastructure Initiatives.”

A wave of recent changes in federal and state law pertaining to PFAS chemicals is likely to present both immediate and long-term challenges to the government contracting community. At the federal level, contractors that import products, parts, packaging, equipment or other articles with components that contain PFAS must confront new and extensive regulatory reporting requirements relating to such imports going back to 2011, and they must do so by May 2025. At the state level, a growing list of states are enacting total bans on the sale and distribution of such products and components. On top of this flurry of environmental regulatory activity, the Biden Administration continues to direct federal agencies to develop procurement strategies that prioritize the purchase of PFAS-free articles as part the Administration’s broader effort to leverage the federal procurement function in pursuit of climate and sustainability policy objectives.

On March 27, 2023, President Biden signed the Executive Order on Prohibition on Use by the United States Government of Commercial Spyware that Poses Risks to National Security (EO), restricting federal agencies’ use of commercial spyware.  The Biden Administration cited targeted attacks utilizing commercial spyware on U.S. officials and human rights abuses abroad as motivations for these restrictions.

In General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 61633, 61731 (Feb. 8, 2023), released March 14, 2023, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) considered, but declined to answer, the existential question of whether intracompany lease payments are “costs.”  The ASBCA denied the Government’s motion for summary judgment, finding that material facts about the contractor’s intracompany lease payments remained in dispute.  Further, the ASBCA held that because the Government failed to respond to the contractor’s affirmative defense that the Government’s claim was barred by the statute of limitations, the Government was not entitled to summary judgment.

On February 28, 2023, the Commerce Department released the first Notice of Funding Opportunity (“First NOFO”) under the recently enacted CHIPS and Science Act (CHIPS Act), P.L. 117-167. The First NOFO seeks applications for assistance—including direct funding, loans, and loan guarantees—for projects to construct, expand, or modernize commercial semiconductor facilities.  

As previewed in President Biden’s State of the Union Address, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a proposed rule and notification of proposed guidance on February 9, 2023 to improve uniformity and consistency in the implementation of Build America, Buy America (BABA) requirements applicable to federally funded infrastructure projects pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).

On January 17, 2023, Kenneth A. Polite, Jr, Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice (DOJ)’s Criminal Division, delivered a speech at Georgetown Law School announcing the first significant changes to the Criminal Division’s Corporate Enforcement Policy (“CEP”) since 2017. The changes answer the call of Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco and provide companies with new and concrete incentives to self-disclose wrongdoing and meaningfully cooperate with DOJ investigations. Most notably, DOJ is offering both a new path to avoid prosecution, and, in cases where a criminal resolution is warranted, the opportunity to obtain as much as 75% off the low end of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines fine range. The revisions also include incentives for companies that do not voluntarily self-disclose, but still fully cooperate and remediate—even these companies can obtain a 50% reduction in fines.

This week, the Department of Labor (DOL) and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a memo directing all agencies to designate “agency labor advisers” who are responsible for advising agencies on “Federal contract labor matters.”  FAR Part 22 contemplates the appointment of “agency labor advisors,” and requires contractors to contact them about potential labor disputes or questions; however, DOL and OMB found not all agencies have such a role.

On December 19, 2022, DoD issued a DFARS proposed rule that seeks to (1) implement the data-rights portions of the May 2, 2019 Small Business Innovation Research Program and Small Business Technology Transfer Program Policy Directive (SBIR/STTR Policy Directive), and (2) impose significant changes to technical data and computer software marking requirements.  The SBIR/STTR portion of the proposed rule follows DoD’s advance notice of proposed rulemaking issued on August 31, 2020 (see 85 FR 53758) and incorporates the eight written public comments that DoD received. The proposed changes to marking requirements go beyond the SBIR/STTR Policy Directive and respond to the Federal Circuit’s decision in The Boeing Co. v. Secretary of the Air Force, 983 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2020).

On December 27, 2022, President Biden signed into law the Preventing Organizational Conflicts of Interest in Federal Acquisition Act (S.3905) to strengthen the current rules relating to identification and mitigation of organizational conflicts of interest (OCIs) in federal acquisition. The Act focuses on updating the current FAR provision, Subpart 9.5, to provide clear definitions, examples, and guidance on potential OCIs and to consider expanding the Subpart to cover certain commercial and foreign relationships.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023, signed into law on December 23, 2022, makes numerous changes to acquisition policy. Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group discusses the most consequential changes for government contractors here. These include changes that provide new opportunities for contractors to recover inflation-related costs, authorize new programs for small businesses, impose new clauses or reporting requirements on government contractors, require government reporting to Congress on acquisition authorities and programs, and alter other processes and procedures to which government contractors are subject. The FY 2023 NDAA also includes the Advancing American AI Act, the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2023, and the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, all of which include provisions relevant for government contractors.

Partners David Robbins and Peter Eyre published an article in National Defense magazine on complying with the new Justice Department Guidance concerning ethics and compliance programs. Eyre, Robbins, and Pat Harned of Ethics & Compliance Initiative will further discuss this guidance and the current state of ethics and compliance at a Crowell & Moring breakfast series event at 8:30am on June 25 at the Tysons Corner Marriott Hotel. Register here.

The Office of Government Ethics has issued a final rule revising the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch applicable to the solicitation and acceptance of gifts from outside sources imposing a duty to decline otherwise permissible gifts when the appearance of impropriety is present, adding new examples of how to apply the rules, codifying previous interpretations of the gift rule, and retaining the $20 de minimis exception. In the rule, discussed more fully here, OGE says it will provide additional guidance and training as warranted.

On November 2, 2016, the Office of Government Ethics issued a final rule amending the regulations setting forth the elements and procedures of the executive branch ethics program by defining and describing the executive branch ethics program, delineating the responsibilities of various government stakeholders, and enumerating key executive branch ethics procedures. Among the various amendments, which are detailed in our blog post, the final rule centralizes the procedures of the executive branch ethics program and modifies the procedures for the correction of agency noncompliance by outlining several remedial actions that may be taken.

On July 26, 2016, the Office of Government Ethics issued a final rule updating the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, subpart F, “Seeking Other Employment” (5 C.F.R. 2635), to clarify recusal requirements. Recusals are required when the scope of the federal employee’s duties has a “direct and predictable” effect on the financial interest of an entity with whom the employee is either negotiating prospective employment or with whom the employee has any agreement concerning prospective employment, and the final rule also adds a new section to implement the statutory notification requirements under section 17 of the STOCK Act, which applies to individuals required to file public financial disclosure reports.

On April 12, 2016, DoD sent its legislative proposal package to Congress and requested (in section 805) changes to the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act to create, in DoD’s view, a more viable administrative remedy for fraud and false claims totaling less than $500,000. In addition to increasing the ceiling on false claims allegations that can be brought under the PFCRA, DoD seeks to place the decision of whether adequate evidence of liability exists in the hands of suspending and debarring officials, raising for contractors serious concerns, some of which are summarized in the associated blog post.

A recent DoD IG report called into question the reliability of DoD’s revolving door ethics opinion database, noting the database was unable to generate information required by Congress. This report suggests contractors may be the next to face inquiries and underscores the importance of proper procedures and recordkeeping when hiring former government employees.

In Wagner v. FEC (July 7, 2015), the D.C. Circuit upheld the seventy-five-year-old ban on political donations by individual contractors to federal candidates and political parties. Despite the First Amendment and equal protection arguments the plaintiffs raised, the court held that the compelling interests that support the contribution ban – protection against quid pro quo corruption and defense of merit-based public administration – are "neither theoretical nor antiquated, but rather are grounded in unhappy experience stretching to the present day."

On January 13, the Court of Federal Claims in Shell Oil Co. v. U.S. held (1) the government was not liable for CERCLA environmental cleanup costs under the "Taxes" clause in certain World War II-era contracts; and (2) even if the "Taxes" clause had provided for indemnification, any indemnification rights were not preserved after contract termination. The "Taxes" clause and the absence of a reservation of rights to pursue indemnification in Shell is in contrast with the explicit "hold harmless" clauses in the facilities contracts cases in which the contractor reserved its rights to pursue indemnification (Ford and DuPont) and indemnification clauses authorized under Public Law 85-804, which contain explicit post-contract termination provisions.

If you missed Tuesday's important webinar on the new mandatory disclosure rule, the recorded session and powerpoint presentation are now available on our website. The panel provided in-depth analysis of the mandatory disclosure obligations on federal contractors and subcontractors for "significant overpayments," violations of federal criminal laws involving fraud, conflict of interest, bribery or gratuity violations, and violations of the civil False Claims Act and also provided practical guidance on how your company can meet the the major challenges in complying with this new rule.