On January 6, 2023, the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) announced new interim guidance for evaluating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). CEQ published the guidance in the Federal Register on January 9, 2023, and it is immediately effective for all federal agencies. Nevertheless, the
The Inflation Reduction Act’s Sowing of Biofuels for Future Harvests
More Time to Claim Tax Credits
| The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is one of the most ambitious pieces of legislation yet aimed at combating climate change and promoting energy independence. Its proponents claim that it will reduce carbon emissions by 40%, relative to 2005 levels, over the next decade by incentivizing new infrastructure developments such |
Myth-Busting: New Final FAR Rules Says You Can Speak with Agency Personnel During a Procurement, Or Can You?
On December 1, 2022, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (comprised of both the civilian and military acquisition regulatory councils) issued the final FAR rule on “Effective Communication between Government and Industry.” The final rule becomes effective on December 30, 2022. This final rule is a long time coming.
Dan Gordon, the Office of Federal Procurement
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 Bill Passes House and Moves to Senate Where Amendments Are Being Proposed
Fiscal Year 2023 started on October 1 and, without a final set of Department of Defense (DoD) authorizations and appropriations, the DoD currently is operating under continuing resolution. A version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2023 bill passed the House of Representatives and has been sent to the Senate for its consideration. The House version, H.R. 7900, in addition to authorizing the procurement of various items, would provide for further environmental and equity initiatives, such as providing for (i) electric vehicle charging stations at commissary stores and military exchanges, (ii) a pilot program to facilitate the transition of certain nontactical vehicles to electric vehicles, (iii) a temporary prohibition on cost-sharing requirements for contraceptive prescriptions and related services, (iv) imposition of data standards for certain agencies, (v) development of “gender-neutral fitness standards” for certain military occupational specialties, as well as (vi) prohibition on barring a veteran from federal employment solely because the veteran consumes or has consumed cannabis, and more.
Continue Reading National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 Bill Passes House and Moves to Senate Where Amendments Are Being Proposed
DC Circuit Sets FCA Offset Standard to Limit What the Government Can Recover in USA v. Honeywell International Inc.
The civil False Claims Act (FCA) prohibits entities from fraudulently inducing the Government to contract, take or refrain from taking action, or make payment. Under the FCA, contractors that falsely certify their compliance with contract specifications can be assessed a civil penalty for each false claim in addition to treble damages. In USA v. Honeywell International Inc., the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was asked to determine the appropriate measure of damages arising from allegedly false claims made about the ballistic performance of Z Shield material made from Zylon fiber purchased from third parties and sold by Honeywell to Armor Holdings for the production of bullet proof vests, which were then sold to the federal Government and federally-funded state and local government entities. In the case, the Government sought approximately $35 million in damages for the full amount paid for the vests, trebled. During the proceedings, the Government recovered $36 million in settlements with Armor Holdings and the Zylon providers for their role in the manufacturing and supply of the vests. Honeywell, which had not settled, moved for summary judgment to apply a pro tanto approach to the calculation of damages that would be owed in light of these settlements. Specifically, Honeywell argued that since the Government only sought $35 million in damages, its recovery of $36 million in settlements should preclude the Government from recovering any damages from Honeywell even if the facts alleged in the case were true. The Government sought to recover a proportionate share of damages from Honeywell under its proposed offset standard, which would allow for the Government to recover more than the $35 million sought in the case.
Continue Reading DC Circuit Sets FCA Offset Standard to Limit What the Government Can Recover in USA v. Honeywell International Inc.