Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Training
    • Class Registration
    • On-demand Training
    • GTPAC COVID-19 Resource Page
    • Cybersecurity
    • Veterans Verification Video
    • GTPAC Community
    • Other Training Audio & Video
  • Useful Links
  • Team Directory
    • Albany Counselor
    • Atlanta Counselors
    • Augusta Counselor
    • Carrollton Counselor
    • Columbus Counselor
    • Gainesville Counselor
    • Savannah Counselor
    • Warner Robins Counselor
  • Directions
    • Atlanta – Training Facility
    • Atlanta – Office
    • Albany
    • Augusta
    • Carrollton
    • Columbus
    • Gainesville
    • Savannah
    • Warner Robins
  • COVID-19
  • New Client Application
  • Contact Us

New defense rules might cost contractors money

May 2, 2012 By ei2admin

The final Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), released in February, is an improvement over its predecessor, but its withholding clause could cause problems and payment delays for many Defense Department contractors, experts say.

An April 25 cross-industry panel of contracting experts agreed that the new DFARS is the most comprehensive change in federal contracting in several years.

But they centered their attention on assessing the new withholding clause, which calls for withholding a percentage of the contract payment if the Defense Contracting Management Agency finds “significant deficiencies” in any of six business systems cited in the new rule.

Timothy Callahan, executive director for contracts at DCMA, said the old rule had a variety of regulations, no consistent language in determining whether a contractor’s work was adequate or inadequate, and what and how corrective actions were to be taken.

“Under the way we were operating if a contractor had a deficiency with a business system, they put forward an adequate corrective action plan; that submittal of an adequate action plan oftentimes was sufficient to change the status from a disapproved system to an approved system,” Callahan said.

“And there really wasn’t the follow-through on either the contractor’s part or our oversight to ensure that that corrective action plan was put into place,” he added.

The new DFARS business system clause normally does not apply to small businesses, competitive fixed price contracts or contracts less than $7.5 million, he said, adding that the agency will issue a withhold assessment on contracts valued at more than $50 million.

Callahan said DCMA now will use a four-phase program to determine if any of six contract business systems are judged to contain “significant deficiencies.”

“If it’s one business system, the withhold [amount] is 5 percent. If it’s two or more business systems that are being disapproved, the maximum is 10 percent,” he said.

“The withholds are against the financing arrangements of the contract,” Callahan explained, including progress payments, performance-based payments and interim cost vouchers.

The contractor then has 45 days to turn in its corrective action plan.

“If it’s an adequate corrective action plan the withhold will be reduced by 2 percent,” Callahan said. “We’re trying to minimize the hurt but still keep the pressure on to get this corrective action implemented.”

When the contractor notifies the government of the implementation, the government has 90 days to validate that corrective action has indeed occurred and that the deficiencies have been corrected.

“If we don’t get out there within 90 days, it’s another automatic reduction in the withhold [penalty] of 50 percent,” he said.

Participants at the Compusearch-sponsored panel “Contracting in a Time of Change” agreed there was a definite need for a new DFARs rule.

But Robert Burton, partner at Venable law firm and former deputy administrator in the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, called the business system clause draconian and hard to implement.

Alan Chvotkin, executive vice president and counsel at the Professional Services Council, said there is a lot of mythology surrounding the rule.

However, he praised DFARS for providing “contractor engagement and response at every opportunity. So it’s really moved to a compliance rule rather than a withholding rule.”

Chvotkin said the attributes in each of the six business systems are more clearly defined now than they were early on in the drafting process “But there’s still a lot of ambiguity and a lot of room for interpretation,” he said.

Addressing the ambiguity and need for interpretation, Chvotkin offered several steps contractors need to take even before winning a contract affected by the rule.

He said contractors should always document their own business systems, be aware proactively of the contract clauses and the risks inherent in DFARS.

Robin Schulze, director of the Government Contractor Advisory Services at accountants Baker Tilly Virchow Krause LLP, said she believed the strength of the new DFARS was its peer review requirement.

But she said, “I believe that when you get the initial determination [of a deficiency] if you were able, in your response to that, provide an action plan you could start at 2 percent [withhold] instead of the 5 percent. And the same thing should be true if you voluntarily disclose a deficiency that you’ve identified and have already started working of it.”

Defending the clause and the remediation process, Callahan suggested that if a contractor knows there is a problem and takes corrective action right away, “we can start out with a withhold of 2 percent, it doesn’t have to be 5 percent,” he added.

“We would like this to be a collaborative operation,’ Callahan said, “where we’re communicating as we go along.”

About the Author: David Hubler is senior editor of Washington Technology.  This article was published on Apr. 25, 2012 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2012/04/25/panel-on-dfars.aspx?s=wtdaily_260412.

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: contractor performance, DCMA, DFARS, DoD, penalty, retainage, small business, wherewithal

Federal Acquisition Regulation change issued on “retainage”

April 6, 2010 By ei2admin

The Federal Acquisition Regulation Council (FAR Council) has published a final rule revising a clause applied to federal contracts for architecture and engineering (A&E) services that mandated that 10 percent of fees be withheld or retained from a firm, regardless of the quality of the firm’s performance.

In publishing the final rule, the regulations body said, “FAR Case 2008-015 amends the clause at FAR 52.232-10 “Payments Under Fixed-Price Architect-Engineer Contracts”, to revise and clarify the retainage requirements. The contracting officer can (but is not mandated to) withhold up to 10 percent of the payment due in any billing period when the contracting officer determines that such a withholding is necessary to protect the Government’s interest and ensure satisfactory completion of the contract. However, withholding the entire 10 percent is not required, and no withholding is required if the contractor’s performance has been satisfactory. The changes clarify that retainage is optional and any amounts retained should not be held over beyond the satisfactory completion of the instant contract.”

“This rule was an unbearable burden for the A&E community,” according to Patrick Olson, P.E., L.S., (AERO-METRIC, Inc., Sheboygan, WI), president of The Council on Federal Procurement of Architectural and Engineering Services (COFPAES).  “The 10 percent retainage meant A&E firms were bankers to the government, providing interest free loans that often exceed a firm’s profit margin on a contract.  We had reports from member firms of millions of dollars in retainage, held for several years, on contracts where the firm receive the highest possible performance ratings.  We are delighted this regulation has been changed.”

COFPAES Administrator John Palatiello noted, “Given that architect-engineer contracts, including surveying and mapping contracts, are awarded on a qualifications based selection process, and a firm’s experience and past performance are paramount factors in winning a contract, the retainage provision has little value to the government.  Moreover, it was a severe cash flow burden on our member firms, particularly small businesses.”

The retainage rule was identified by the Small Business Administration’s Office of Chief Counsel for Advocacy as one of the most burdensome for small business in the office’s 2008 Regulatory Review and Reform (R3) initiative (http://www.sba.gov/advo/r3/r3_services08.html).  The revision to the FAR on A&E retainage is the first regulation to have gone through the entire R3 process, from nomination, through Advocacy endorsement, and to final regulatory revision.

To view the final rule, go to: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-5991.htm

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: A&E, contractor performance, FAR, government contract assistance, retainage, SBA

Recent Posts

  • Georgia Tech creates new Office of Corporate Engagement
  • Federal contractor indicted for stealing over $1.2 million from the U.S. Postal Service
  • SBA hosting “Contract Bonds and Surety Bond Guarantee” webinar April 20th
  • GSA hosting “Getting on the GSA Schedule” webinar April 13th
  • NIH hosting 2021 small business program conference April 26-30th

Popular Topics

8(a) abuse Army bid protest budget budget cuts certification construction contract awards contracting opportunities cybersecurity DoD DOJ False Claims Act FAR federal contracting federal contracts fraud GAO Georgia Tech government contracting government contract training government trends GSA GSA Schedule GTPAC HUBZone innovation IT Justice Dept. marketing NDAA OMB SBA SDVOSB set-aside small business small business goals spending subcontracting technology VA veteran owned business VOSB wosb

Contracting News

Federal contractor indicted for stealing over $1.2 million from the U.S. Postal Service

CMMC announces new advisory council to collect industry feedback

EEOC announces April 26 opening date for the collection of 2019 and 2020 EEO-1 component 1 data

Contractors line up to rebuild MARTA’s Five Points Station

GDOT announces $828.8 million in projects to transform Ga. 316

Read More

Contracting Tips

A whole new marketplace: GSA’s “commercial platforms” initiative

CRS Reports: Mentor-Protégé programs and small business size standards

CRS Report: Small businesses and COVID-19, relief and assistance resources

How do I find out what the government is buying?

Past performance isn’t always a required evaluation factor, says GAO

Read More

GTPAC News

SBA hosting “Contract Bonds and Surety Bond Guarantee” webinar April 20th

GSA hosting “Getting on the GSA Schedule” webinar April 13th

NIH hosting 2021 small business program conference April 26-30th

Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency hosting industry day and matchmaking May 6th and 20th

Missile Defense Agency hosting virtual conference May 11-13th

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Georgia Tech creates new Office of Corporate Engagement

Delta Jacket wins 2021 Georgia Tech InVenture prize

Future of 5G is under the microscope at Georgia incubator

Collective worm and robot “blobs” protect individuals, swarm together

The Partnership for Inclusive Innovation is now accepting applications for pilot programs

Read More

  • SAM.gov registration is free, and help with SAM is free, too
APTAC RSS Twitter GTPAC - 30th Year of Service

Copyright © 2021 · Georgia Tech - Enterprise Innovation Institute