DCAA Relations, Department of Defense News

What KB&R Says in their suit Alleging DCAA Malpractice

“13. DCAA’s negligence caused KBR to incur $12,507,051.76 in professional and internal administrative costs to litigate those actions. The facts and information underlying DCAA’s malpractice were, at all times, uniquely in the government’s possession, and therefore KBR was unable to discover that DCAA was the proximate cause of its injuries until January 6, 2012. KBR is entitled to recover $12,507,051.76 as money damages under the FTCA, 28 U.S.C.  1346(b), 2671-80, as a direct result of DCAA’s professional malpractice”

Excerpt from KB&R’s alleging malpractice by DCAA.

The full complaint can be found here.

Advertisements
Standard
Accounting System, DCAA Relations, Department of Defense News, Incurred Cost Proposals

New OIG Audit Indicates DCAA Problems Continues

We identified 1 or more significant inadequacies on 13 of the 16 selected DCAA audits.  We found deficiencies with generally accepted government auditing standards in the areas of audit planning, evidence, working paper documentation, and supervision.  In addition, our review disclosed instances of auditors not obtaining adequate cost or pricing data.

http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/report_summary.cfm?id=5967

Standard
DCAA Relations, Department of Defense News, Running Your Business

I wonder if that applies to DCAA Audit Findings?

A recent appeals board decision (ASBCA No. 58063) made the following interesting statements:

“The motion reasserts contentions that any such contract
lacked an express Disputes clause, which is an essential foundation for our jurisdiction
over WMA TA contractual disputes. In determining that we were empowered to
resolve whether Delta’s interactions and communications with WMATA gave rise to
the alleged implied-in-fact contract, we held that, if appellant’s allegations are proven,
WMATA’s acquisition procedures mandated incorporation of the Disputes clause.”

AND

“However, the absence of an express Disputes clause in the purchase order is
irrelevant. Whether the alleged implied-in-fact contract is viewed as a discrete,
independent agreement or as an ancillary implied term of the purchase agreement, the
clause is required by the WMATA Procurement Manual (WPM) (2004).”

The Point?  Polices and Procedures govern simply by the fact of their existence, enforcement is secondary.

Standard