Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

ASBCA voids release of government’s liability because small business subjected to duress

By

As a general rule, when a contractor signs a full settlement and release with respect to a dispute with the Government, the dispute is considered settled, and the Government is released from any further liability for that particular claim.

There are, however, exceptions to the rule.

One rare exception is when the Government subjects the contractor to duress, which may render the release null and void.

In a remarkable decision, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) recently voided a release for precisely this reason and sustained an appeal where there was evidence of a pattern of improper procurement practices, abuse of discretion in the administration of the contract, and a breach of the Government’s duty of good faith and fair dealing.

The ASBCA also made a point of scolding the procurement and contracting officials who treated a struggling small business in such an appalling manner.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/747456/

Fort Stewart contractor that posed as small business forfeits $7.8 million

By

A company that rents tents and other outdoor structures for events agreed to pay the government $7.8 million to settle charges that it wrongly won Defense Department set-aside contracts reserved for small businesses.

Arena Americas, which does business from multiple locations as Arena Event Services, settled after a False Claims Act investigation conducted by the Army Criminal Investigation Command, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and the inspector general of the Small Business Administration.

The agreement details how Arena Americas worked with Military Training Solutions LLC to obtain small business defense contracts that were represented as being performed by Military Training Solutions, but were actually performed by Arena Americas.

“As a result of this scheme, which was perpetuated at Fort Stewart, Ga., and at other military installations across the United States, millions of dollars in defense contracts wrongfully were awarded to Arena Americas instead of legitimate small businesses,” said Bobby Christine, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Georgia, in a statement. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office will not tolerate any attempts to illegally exploit the system for a company’s personal advantage” in obtaining the set-asides that Congress intended as a tool to help grow small businesses.

Keep reading this article at: https://m.govexec.com/contracting/2018/10/defense-contractor-who-posed-small-business-forfeits-78-million/151951

See statement by U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Georgia at: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdga/pr/defense-contractor-agrees-pay-united-states-78-million-settle-false-claims-act

Are you prepared for a contract cancellation?

By

Going back to his campaign pledges, President Trump promised to cut government waste in conjunction with cutting corporate tax rates. As part of this, the president threatened to terminate contracts with the two largest government contractors: Lockheed Martin’s F-35 and Boeing’s Air Force One programs.

A surge in contract terminations could be in the offing as federal agencies align their goals with White House intentions. With this in mind, preparing for the possibility of a contract termination is a defensive strategy that contractors should undertake now. Here are three key steps you should consider immediately:

  1. Plan ahead. Never consider your contract as “termination-proof.”
  2. Fully understand the contract termination process
  3. Learn how to calculate and submit your Request for Equitable Adjustment or settlement proposal.

The possibility of a contract termination should be incorporated into every government contractor’s business continuity plan. Implementing safeguards and procedures designed to mitigate the risk of a termination will limit the impact it has on your organization’s operations. Ask yourself, “Does my organization have procedures in place to deal with cure notices, customer complaints, and quality issues? What about monitoring subcontractors?”

Keep reading this article at: https://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2017/06/09/insights-contractor-termination.aspx

Parsons to pay $3.8 million to settle False Claims Act allegations at Savannah River Site

By

Energy Dept.Parsons Government Services Inc. has agreed to pay the Government $3.8 million to settle allegations that the company knowingly mischarged the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for ineligible or inflated short-term and long-term employee relocation costs in connection with its contract on the DOE Salt Waste Processing Facility Project (SWPF) at the DOE Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina.  Terms of the settlement were released  by the U.S. Department of Justice on September 2, 2015.

Justice Dept. seal“Those who expect to do business with the government must do so fairly and honestly,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.  “[The] settlement demonstrates that the Department of Justice will pursue contractors that knowingly seek taxpayer funds to which they are not entitled.”

Since Sept. 1, 2002, Parsons has been the primary construction contractor on the DOE’s SWPF project at the Savannah River Site.  Pursuant to the terms of the SWPF contract, Parsons was entitled to be reimbursed for the payments it made to eligible employees for moving, meals, lodging and transportation expenses incurred when the employees were relocated or transferred by Parsons to work on the SWPF project in Aiken.  In order to be entitled to reimbursement by the DOE, however, Parsons was required to take steps to ensure that the employees met certain contractual requirements of eligibility, such as maintaining a permanent residence at the location from which they were transferred.  The Government alleged that Parsons sought and obtained reimbursement for these relocation expenses under the SWPF contract even for employees it knew did not qualify for these payments under the terms of the contract.

The settlement was the result of a coordinated effort by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of South Carolina, the DOE Savannah River Operations Office and the DOE Office of Inspector General.

The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

Source: http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/parsons-government-services-inc-agrees-pay-38-million-settle-false-claims-act-allegations

S.C. contractor agrees to repay $77,000 involving false claims for DBE work

By

On July 7, 2015, Freeman Bell, as president and on behalf of Premier Constructors (Premier), a South Carolina based highway contractor, entered into a Civil Settlement Agreement with the United States related to allegations that Premier submitted false claims for work performed under the USDOT Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program.

USDOTThe investigation alleged that Premier falsely certified it had completed the DBE work on the federally-funded Stenhouse Road project in Greenville, South Carolina, knowing that the work was actually performed by a non-DBE contractor. The investigation further alleged that Premier Constructors knowingly submitted false payroll certifications for the project that included employees of the non-DBE company and used equipment and other resources from the non-DBE contractor.

According to the terms of the Agreement, Premier agreed to repay the U.S. Government a total of $77,335 to settle the allegations, but does not admit wrongdoing. In May 2015, Premier and Bell entered into a three year Administrative Settlement Agreement with the FHWA, whereby they accepted responsibility for the alleged misconduct. In the agreement they agreed to the implementation of a Corporate Compliance Program, appointment of a Corporate Compliance Officer, and retention of an independent monitor to evaluate the company’s performance of the agreement.

Source: https://www.oig.dot.gov/library-item/32583

$3.8 million multi-state and federal False Claims Act settlement reached

By

Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway announced Kentucky’s participation on last Friday (Feb. 28, 2014) in a more than $3.8 million multi-state and federal settlement with a pharmacy specializing in dispensing drugs to nursing homes.

Omnicare Inc. allegedly received kickbacks from Amgen Inc. to promote the drug Aranesp, a drug used to treat anemia caused by chemotherapy or kidney failure. Between Sept. 1, 2003 and June 30, 2005, Omnicare allegedly solicited and received kickbacks in the form of discounts, grants, market share rebates, consulting services, speaker fees, travel and dinners. The alleged kickbacks were offered in exchange for Omnicare influencing healthcare providers’ selection and use of Aranesp in long-term care facilities.

Omnicare also allegedly implemented therapeutic interchange programs meant to switch patients from a competitor drug to Aranesp and allegedly caused false and/or fraudulent claims for Aranesp to be submitted to federal and state Medicaid programs.

Keep reading this article at: http://legalnewsline.com/news/247651-omnicare-to-pay-3-8m-in-false-claims-act-settlement-with-feds-states 

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More