General Services Administration

On September 10, 2020, the General Services Administration (“GSA”) hosted a webinar related to its implementation of Section 889 of the 2019 NDAA – the ban relating to certain Chinese telecom companies – and associated updated FAR clauses.  (We previously have written about Section 889 here, here, here, and here).  Below we provide highlights from the meeting.  Slides presented at the meeting also are available here.
Continue Reading GSA’s Take on Implementation of Section 889

On July 14, 2020 the Department of Defense (“DoD”), General Services Administration (“GSA”), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”) published an Interim Rule amending the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) in order to implement Section 889(a)(1)(B) of the FY 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”).[1] The Interim Rule is effective August 13, 2020, and applies to all solicitations issued after (or resulting in contracts that will be awarded after) the effective date. Interested parties have until September 14, 2020 to submit written comments for consideration in the formation of the Final Rule.
Continue Reading Interim Rule Confirms Section 889 Part B Restriction on Contractor Use of Chinese Telecom Will Go Into Effect August 2020

Just as you’re probably tired of reading COVID-19 articles, we’ve grown tired of writing them.  So, in an effort to party like it’s 2019, we’ve decided to survey the non-COVID-19 initiatives underway at the General Services Administration (“GSA”) while everyone is working from home.  Our survey shows progress continues on Multiple Award Schedule (“MAS”) modifications, a new Verified Product Portal (“VPP”) is on the horizon, and work related to Sections 846 and 889 conSetinues to progress.  Obviously, none of these has anything to do with COVID-19, but they will have an impact on your Federal business, whether you’re working from home or (eventually, and soon we hope) back in the office.  Here’s a look of major projects GSA has been working on while you’ve been social distancing.
Continue Reading While You Were Social Distancing: GSA’s Progress On Section 846, Schedules Consolidation, And Other Major Initiatives

As you probably know, we have been following very closely developments relating to Section 889 of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which prohibits executive agencies from purchasing restricted
Continue Reading The True Impact of the Chinese Telecom Ban on Government Contractors

On September 9, 2019, the U.S. General Services Administration (“GSA”) announced it would be issuing a mass modification (expected sometime this month)[1] requiring all new and existing GSA Multiple Award Schedule (“MAS”) contracts include two new clauses. The new clauses come in response to Section 889 of the FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”), and recently implemented FAR provisions, which impose prohibitions relating to the procurement of certain Chinese telecommunications equipment and services (which we have previously discussed here and here). The two clauses to be added to all MAS contracts are:

  • FAR 52.204-25, Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment (Aug 2019)
  • GSAR 552.204-70, Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment (Aug 2019)


Continue Reading GSA Implements Restrictions on Certain Chinese-Made Telecommunications Services and Equipment

In a case of first impression, the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (“CBCA”) ruled that a contractor performing task orders issued against a government-wide acquisition contract (“GWAC”) properly submitted its claims to the Agency Ordering Contracting Officer (“OCO”) instead of the Procuring Contracting Officer (“PCO”). The case – Sotera Defense Solutions, Inc. v. Department of Agriculture, CBCA 6029, 6030, 2019 WL 1977388 (Apr. 25, 2019) – involved two task orders issued by the Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) to Sotera Defense Solutions, Inc. (“Sotera”) for the provision of information technology (“IT”) support services at agency locations throughout the country. The USDA issued the task orders against a GWAC awarded by the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”). A GWAC, as explained by the CBCA in its decision, is defined by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) as a “task-order or delivery order contract for [IT] established by one agency for Governmentwide use.”
Continue Reading CBCA Rules Contractor Under GWAC Task Orders Properly Submitted Claims to the Agency Ordering Contracting Officer Instead of the Procuring Contracting Officer

On May 2, 2019, the General Services Administration (“GSA”) and the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) finally released their Phase 2 Implementation Report (the “Phase 2 Report”) for “Procurement Through E-Commerce Portals,” as directed by Section 846 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (“FY 2018 NDAA”).[1]

GSA/OMB offered a sneak preview of the Phase 2 Report at an Industry Day held on December 12, 2018, during which GSA/OMB revealed their intent to proceed with a proof of concept contract utilizing only the E-Marketplace model. Industry pushback against a single model proof of concept was both quick and severe and, coupled with the lengthy delay issuing the Phase 2 Report, many wondered whether GSA/OMB were reevaluating their proposed approach.
Continue Reading The Future of COTS Procurement: Top 10 Questions from GSA’s Section 846 Phase 2 Report

In two recent opinions, the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) has declined to reconsider protests it dismissed during the recent lapse in its jurisdiction over protests of civilian agency task and delivery orders valued at more than $10 million under multiple-award IDIQ contracts.  In a third opinion, GAO dismissed a protest filed for the first time following reinstatement of that jurisdiction, when the protestor received its debriefing during GAO’s jurisdictional lapse.  The GAO’s lapse in jurisdiction, which did not impact military agency task orders or Federal Supply Schedule task orders, began October 1, 2016, when a sunset provision established by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 took effect, and ended December 14, 2016, when President Obama signed the GAO Civilian Task and Delivery Order Protest Authority Act (the “Act”) into law, removing that sunset provision. Several disappointed offerors have since attempted to have their protests heard or reconsidered based on the change in law, each unsuccessfully.
Continue Reading GAO Declines to Apply GAO Civilian Task and Delivery Order Protest Authority Act Retroactively to Lapse in Jurisdiction

You no doubt have heard by now about GSA’s 23 June effort to “embrace  modern  technology while moving away from outmoded practices” – specifically, its implementation of the new Transactional Data Reporting Rule (“TDR Rule”) and its concurrent elimination of the Price Reductions Clause (“PRC”) and the Commercial Sales Practices Format (“CSPF”).  See 81 Fed. Reg. 41104 (June 23, 2016). The new rule covers certain GSA Multiple Award Schedules as well as the Agency’s GWAC and IDIQ contracts.   As it represents the most significant change to the GSA MAS program since  1994  (when  GSA  removed  federal  sales  as  a PRC trigger), the new rule has the potential to change significantly the way Schedule contractors (and others) do  business;  hence,  my  willingness  to  interrupt  your otherwise enjoyable day with a treatise on GSA Schedule contracting.
Continue Reading Price Reductions Are Dead; Long Live Price Reductions

The federal government sector has been abuzz lately with whispers and shouts about pending cybersecurity regulations, frameworks, and requirements. This attention is not particularly surprising, especially given the recent high-profile data breaches, the litigation threats surrounding those breaches, the recent identification of the encryption-disabling, consumer data threatening “Heartbleed SSL” OpenSSL vulnerability, and recent reports that the September 2013 cyber-incursion into the U.S. Navy’s Intranet network could have been prevented with the proper security contracting mechanism.  Notably, however, while these stories – and the resultant damages that these stories’ topics leave in their wake – remain in the headlines, Congress has yet to act (and according to Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN), will likely not be acting anytime soon). By contrast, the Executive branch, and especially the FTC, is in a full-on sprint and tackling cybersecurity wherever it can be found.
Continue Reading The Cybersecurity Race: Executive Branch Takes The Lead While Congress Watches From The Bleachers

By John Chierichella and Jonathan Aronie

Note: The following post is adapted from the forthcoming 2012/2013 GSA Schedule Handbook, published by ThompsonWest, due out later this year.

The past 12 months were interesting ones for the Multiple Award Schedule Program. To the dismay of many, and the embarrassment of some, the General Services Administration seems to find it hard to stay out of the press these days.


Continue Reading What Happens In Vegas Doesn’t Seem To Stay In Vegas: A Different Take on GSA’s Recent Woes