A contractor’s “present responsibility” status is its most important asset. Suspension, proposed debarment, or debarment from government contracting of an individual, business unit, or corporate entity can have catastrophic business impacts, precluding that individual, unit, or entity from receiving and competing for government contracts potentially for years. Moreover, under the rigorous internal compliance program and mandatory disclosure requirements now in place [see Ethics Advice & Compliance Audits and Plans], contractors bear the burden of self-policing and self-reporting their own activities and taking the steps necessary to avoid suspension and debarment is even more critical.
Wiley Rein Government Contracts attorneys are experienced with advising contractors facing threatened suspension and debarment, earning a reputation for forthrightness, steady guidance, and integrity. We have worked extensively with U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, U.S. Army, Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Suspension and Debarment Officials as well as the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), among others, to prevent, negotiate, and resolve threatened suspensions and debarment actions. Our clients have included contractors of all sizes, from major defense contractors and large commercial companies with smaller government contracting footprints to small businesses and individuals. Our attorneys have assisted clients in responding to show-cause notices; advocated for contractors facing potential suspension or debarment in meetings, negotiations, and presentations to agency debarring officials; negotiated administrative agreements to avoid suspension and debarment; and worked with contractors to shore up compliance practices in response to threatened suspension or debarment. The following matters are representative of the many suspension, debarment, and present responsibility matters we have handled:
- Three contractors accused (one convicted) of criminal wrongdoing: Negotiated resolution to avoid their suspension or debarment.
- Major Government contractor accused of procurement fraud: Negotiated contract amendments, a comprehensive administrative agreement, and settlement agreements with various agencies of the government, ultimately leading to the lifting of suspension against the contractor.
- Major Government contractor accused of contract mischarging: Responded to a notice of intent to suspend or debar the contractor. After providing a detailed factual response and evidence of current responsibility the Government chose to forgo further administrative action.
- Major Government contractor accused of multiple mischarging offenses: Responded to show-cause notice on behalf of contractor, demonstrating contractor's present responsibility and avoiding suspension or debarment for major business unit.
- Contractor employee accused of ethical misconduct: Guided contractor through disclosure to agency of employees' ethical issues with no suspension, debarment, or other sanctions and assisted in development of a compliance program and training for the contractor.
- Contractor accused of violating conflict of interest regulations: Assisted contractor in developing administrative agreement and compliance program to enable it to continue federal contracting.
- Contractor accused of providing illegal gratuities to procurement officials: Negotiated an administrative agreement, avoiding debarment of the contractor.
- Contractor accused of violating Procurement Integrity Act “revolving door” provisions: Assisted contractor and an employee respond to Suspension/Debarment Official investigation, negotiate administrative agreement avoiding debarment of the contractor, and successfully complete the term of the administrative agreement without incident.
ISSUE: FALL 2014
IN THIS ISSUE
- New Labor Executive Orders and Rules to Impose New Compliance Obligations on Contractors
- The “No Federal Contracts for Corporate Deserters Act of 2014”—Congress’s Latest Attempt to Address Inverted Domestic Corporations
- COFC Decisions Reinforce Challenges, But Open the Door, for Subcontractors Pursuing Claims for Nonpayment Directly Against the Government
- The Court Trusts, But You Should Verify—D.C. Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Qui Tam Alleging Reseller Violated the TAA
- Speeches & Publications
Time to Pay the Piper: Department of Labor Imposes a Three-Year Debarment for Violations of the Service Contract Act
By Eric W. Leonard and Tyler E. Robinson
April 30, 2014
Taking the Long View on the Interagency Suspension & Debarment Committee’s Latest Report
By Kara M. Sacilotto and Craig Smith
April 15, 2014 | Bloomberg BNA's Federal Contracts Report
Jury Reaches Verdict: Lockheed Did Not Fraudulently Underbid Air Force Contract
By Kevin J. Maynard and P. Nicholas Peterson
March 31, 2014