In April 2012, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System ("FAPIIS") database, with the
exception of contractor past performance reviews, became available
for public review. The FAPIIS database is part of the effort to
streamline past performance and responsibility information enacted
into law in 2008 in the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act (the "Act") (Public Law 110-417). The
Act requires the development and maintenance of an information
system that contains specific data on the integrity and performance
of certain federal contractors and grantees that contracting
officers must consult before awarding a contract. FAPIIS allows
users access to centralized information from different Governmental
reporting mechanisms such as the Contractor Performance Assessment
Reporting System, the Central Contractor Registration
("CCR") database, and suspension and debarment
information from the Excluded Parties List System. FAPIIS, through
its component systems, contains contractor records of any mandatory
disclosures in connection with a Government contract, as well as
information on civil and criminal proceedings and defective cost or
Observers have expressed concern that some of the information
available on FAPIIS, notably documents related to suspension and
debarment proceedings, contains sensitive and proprietary
information that a company would not want disclosed to the public.
In response to this and other concerns, such as the potential
reporting of false information about a contractor, the Government
has included a feature in FAPIIS that gives a contractor seven
days' notice of proposed information disclosures on the system
and the opportunity to object. FAPIIS provides the notice to the
point of contact identified by the contractor on the CCR database.
The contractor's objection must explain which Freedom of
Information Act exemption precludes release of the information,
reference the FAPIIS clause (FAR 52.209-9) and explicitly request
that the information be removed. The short turn around on
objections means that the contractor must ensure that the matter is
received and handled expeditiously and that an appropriate response
team is in place to refute any false information as well as to
object to any information that should be protected.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
On March 30, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a decision imposing certain socio-economic contract requirements on subcontractors operating hospitals associated with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Centers.
The Department of Defense has issued a new instruction that establishes internal DOD policies for detecting, avoiding, and remediating counterfeit parts in the DOD supply chain, and allocates responsibility among various DOD offices and functions for administering or developing those counterfeit prevention policies.
In 1997, the Virginia Supreme Court sent a chill down the spines of many companies operating under teaming agreements with a Virginia choice of law provision. In W.J. Schafer Associates, Inc. v. Cordant, Inc., 493 S.E. 2d 514 (Va. 1997), that court held a teaming agreement to be unenforceable on the ground that "agreements to agree in the future" are "too vague and too indefinite to be enforced."