The Trump Administration continues to focus on procurement reform aimed at increasing acquisition efficiency, including through the “Revolutionary FAR Overhaul” and reinforced preference for commercial products. Now, with the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) introducing a defense procurement reform bill, it is clear that HASC leadership is also targeting increased efficiency as a key goal of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (FY26 NDAA). We cover the bill’s key proposals and their potential impact on defense contractors below.Continue Reading SPEEDing up Procurement?: House Armed Services Bill Seeks to Reform Defense Acquisition
GAO: DCAA Built a Valuable Bench of Independent Public Accountants, Now What?
The Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) released a report on the Defense Contract Audit Agency’s (“DCAA”) past and future use of private-sector, independent public accountants to augment its auditor workforce. The initiative—approved under Section 803 of the Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”)—began in fiscal year 2020 and was originally envisioned by Congress as a tool to reduce DCAA’s backlog of incurred cost audits. But, as GAO noted, DCAA had largely eliminated its audit backlog by the end of FY 2018, primarily through its reliance on risk-based sampling methodology, which reduced the number of audits DCAA was required to complete.Continue Reading GAO: DCAA Built a Valuable Bench of Independent Public Accountants, Now What?
Reintroduced SHIPS Act Signals Continued Momentum for Domestic Maritime Investment
On April 20th, a bipartisan, bicameral group of lawmakers, including Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Senator Todd Young (R-Ind.) in the Senate and Representative John Garamendi (D-Calif.) and Representative Trent Kelly (R-Miss.) in the House, reintroduced the Shipbuilding and Harbor Infrastructure for Prosperity and Security for America Act of 2025 (the “SHIPS Act” or the “Act”). The SHIPS Act’s sponsors describe the bill as a “comprehensive approach to revitalizing the U.S. Merchant Marine.” It aims to: (1) establish national oversight and consistent funding for U.S. maritime policy; (2) make U.S.-flagged vessels more commercially competitive through de-regulation; (3) rebuild the U.S. shipyard industrial base; and (4) expand and strengthen the maritime labor force. It also sets a goal for establishing a fleet of 250 U.S.-flagged vessels in international commerce.Continue Reading Reintroduced SHIPS Act Signals Continued Momentum for Domestic Maritime Investment
DoD is Shrinking its Civilian Workforce: What Contractors Should Know Now
Since January 20, the Trump administration has taken numerous executive actions that impact federal government contractors and grant recipients. In just a single day last week, the Trump administration issued a series of EOs and presidential memoranda that, among other things, seek to reform the defense acquisition system, bolster the U.S. maritime industry, and streamline foreign military sales. The potential impact of these changes to Department of Defense (“DoD”) procurement policy are relatively self-evident.
At the same time, the Trump administration has taken various steps to reorganize and reduce the federal workforce, including significant changes to the DoD civilian workforce. The potential effects of these personnel policies are less obvious but may be equally meaningful for defense contractors. This blog focuses on one such executive action, Executive Order 14210 (titled Implementing the President’s ‘‘Department of Government Efficiency’’ Workforce Optimization Initiative) and its potential implications for the defense industrial base.Continue Reading DoD is Shrinking its Civilian Workforce: What Contractors Should Know Now
Renewed Effort to Support Commercial Shipbuilding Capacity and the Domestic Maritime Industry
On April 9th, President Trump issued the Restoring America’s Maritime Dominance Executive Order (“Maritime EO”), which declares that “[i]t is the policy of the United States to revitalize and rebuild domestic maritime industries and workforce to promote national security and economic prosperity.” The Maritime EO aims to improve the nation’s commercial shipbuilding capacity and bolster the maritime workforce. The four corners of the Maritime EO primarily take two key steps—(1) directing the National Security Adviser to prepare a Maritime Action Plan (“MAP”) to revitalize domestic maritime industries and (2) imposing a series of trade-related measures to bolster domestic shipping. The Fact Sheet accompanying the Maritime EO further notes that President Trump has established a new Office of Maritime and Industrial Capacity at the National Security Council, which presumably will help coordinate implementation of the Maritime EO.
While much remains to be seen on how the Maritime EO will be implemented, it is clear that the Trump administration intends to take a multifaceted approach to supporting the domestic maritime industry. In this regard, the EO tracks and builds upon the SHIPS for America Act of 2024 (“SHIPS Act”), proposed legislation that garnered broad bipartisan support last year after its initial introduction in Congress. The SHIPS Act was co-sponsored by then-Rep. Michael Waltz, who as the current National Security Adviser has principal responsibility for managing the development of the MAP that forms the backbone for the EO and its policy objectives. Especially in light of the legislative momentum in this area, we expect that this initial action and any subsequent executive and legislative actions will be of significant interest to a wide range of U.S. businesses, including ship builders and their suppliers.Continue Reading Renewed Effort to Support Commercial Shipbuilding Capacity and the Domestic Maritime Industry
New Executive Actions Address the Defense Acquisition System, U.S. Maritime Industries, Foreign Military Sales, and “Unlawful” Regulations
President Trump issued a series of executive orders (“EOs”) and presidential memoranda on Wednesday, April 9, that could impact government contractors across a broad range of industries. Among other initiatives, these executive actions seek to reform the defense acquisition system, reinvigorate the U.S. maritime industry, and streamline foreign military sales. The actions also reflect President Trump’s goal of catalyzing innovation and economic growth by reducing regulatory burdens, both in general and in the energy industry specifically.
We briefly summarize below the six April 9 executive actions most likely to impact government contractors.Continue Reading New Executive Actions Address the Defense Acquisition System, U.S. Maritime Industries, Foreign Military Sales, and “Unlawful” Regulations
The Proposed FAR Rule on OCIs: Big Changes May Be Coming
Yesterday, the FAR Council issued a proposed rule that would update the U.S. Government’s approach to organizational conflicts of interest (OCIs). While the proposed rule is not finalized and may change in response to forthcoming comments from interested parties, the proposed rule contemplates major changes to the FAR’s existing framework in this area. In this post, we summarize the background leading up to the proposed rule and highlight key areas of proposed change.
Background
Continue Reading The Proposed FAR Rule on OCIs: Big Changes May Be Coming
You Can’t Always Get What You Want: ASBCA Channels Rolling Stones and Awards Contractor $4.9 Million in Delay Damages
A recent decision by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals found the Navy liable to a commercial crane manufacturer for delay damages. In Konecranes Nuclear Equip. & Servs., LLC, ASBCA No. 62797, 2024 WL 2698011 (May 7, 2024), the Board reiterated the age-old lesson—you have to read the contract—and provided guidance about how to calculate the delay damages. Beyond that, the Board found apparent inspiration for part of its holding in an unlikely source: a classic song by the Rolling Stones.Continue Reading You Can’t Always Get What You Want: ASBCA Channels Rolling Stones and Awards Contractor $4.9 Million in Delay Damages
Tick-tock, the Court Starts the Clock: Deconflicting the FCA and Rule 4(m) of the FRCP
In keeping with the trend of increased attention on the False Claims Act’s (“FCA”) qui tam provisions, the Second Circuit recently weighed in on a seeming conflict between the statute and the relator’s obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“FCRP”). Under Rule 4(m) of the FRCP, the court generally must dismiss a complaint if the plaintiff fails to serve the defendant with a complaint and summons within 90 days of filing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). But a relator bringing suit under the qui tam provisions of the FCA may not serve a defendant until the complaint is unsealed and “until the court so orders.” 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(2). In cases brought under the qui tam provisions of the FCA, this creates the potential for questions regarding when the Rule 4(m) service-of-process clock begins to tick.
These questions seldom arise because courts ordinarily unseal a relator’s complaint and simultaneously order the relator to serve the defendant. In which case, the express order to serve the defendant plainly triggers the service-of-process clock under Rule 4(m). But what if the court unseals the relator’s complaint and then delays (or never issues) the order to serve the defendant? This was the question before the Second Circuit last month in U.S. ex rel. Weiner v. Siemens AG, No. 22-2656, 2023 WL 8227913, at 3 (2d Cir. Nov. 28, 2023).Continue Reading Tick-tock, the Court Starts the Clock: Deconflicting the FCA and Rule 4(m) of the FRCP