US Department of Labor Recovers $77k for 5 Employees on Construction Project

Source: DOL

A U.S. Department of Labor investigation has recovered $77,206 in back wages for five workers employed on a federally funded construction project after finding one subcontractor failed to pay prevailing wages and fringe benefits and another submitted falsified payroll records.

The department’s Wage and Hour Division found that two Massachusetts contractors – Claras Construction Inc. and Westview Building Company Inc. – violated the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts while working on a project for the Brookline Housing Authority in 2023. Prime contractor Daniel O’Connell’s Sons Inc. of Holyoke subcontracted to Westview Building Company which, in turn, subcontracted with Claras Construction for framing work.

Click HERE for the full article.

HUBZone Rezoning Updates

Source: SMALLGOVCON

In this post, learn about the remaining proposed changes. SBA’s proposed rule would change HUBZone protests appeals, principal office requirements, HUBZone map concepts, and the HUBZone price evaluation preference (PEP). HUBZone status protests, like 8(a), WOSB/EDWOSB, and VOSB/SDVOSB status protests, can only be brought by SBA, the contracting officer for the procurement, or interested parties (essentially other bidders), per 13 C.F.R. § 126.800. Currently, any offeror on a HUBZone set-aside can bring a HUBZone protest, per 13 C.F.R. § 126.103. As the regulation is written, it doesn’t specify that the offeror has to actually be eligible for the set-aside. As such, SBA wants to change it so that only HUBZone parties can be interested parties for the purposes of a protest. In other words, only other HUBZone businesses could protest another HUBZone company’s HUBZone status. The change would still allow protests by other bidders in an unrestricted procurement where the PEP would affect the award decision as well. We think this only makes sense, and really should just clarify what should have been in the regulation in the first place.

Click HERE for the full article.

Foreign Ownership, Control or Influence (FOCI) Mitigation Specifically for Unclassified Contracts

Source:NATLAWREVIEW

In May 2024, the US Department of Defense (DoD) published the long-awaited DoD Instruction [1] (FOCI Instruction) expanding the FOCI review process from solely US government contractors that access classified information to all US government contractors performing on certain unclassified contracts with a value exceeding US$5 million. For the uninitiated, the US government mitigates FOCI at US companies that require security clearances through the implementation of FOCI mitigation plans. These plans vary based on the nature of the FOCI (and other risks), and can include security controls at the cleared US companies, such as requirements for independent directors, visitation and access controls, restrictions on communications with the foreign owner, and limitations on shared services and operations, among other requirements. Typically, parties that work with the DoD to implement and comply with these mitigation plans do so in order to obtain or maintain facility security clearances (FCLs) required for performance on classified contracts.

Click HERE for the full article.