Procurement: Suspension and Debarment Procedures
NSIAD-87-37BR
Published: Feb 13, 1987. Publicly Released: Mar 09, 1987.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the implementation of suspension and debarment procedures at selected major procuring agencies to determine whether procurement officials should: (1) take specific actions to strengthen the suspension and debarment process; (2) establish suspension and debarment procedures by statute; (3) assign suspension and debarment actions to the various boards of contract appeals; or (4) give explicit guidance to explain what types of business practices could subject businesses to suspension and debarment proceedings.
Recommendations
Matter for Congressional Consideration
Matter | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|
The House Committee on Government Operations may wish to periodically inquire about the status of procuring agencies' efforts to improve the suspension and debarment process, and to alleviate deficiencies. Specifically, these would include: (1) GSA efforts to provide governmentwide access to its computerized Consolidated List; (2) improvements to the coordination and monitoring of procurement fraud investigations and remedies; and (3) efforts to take suspension and debarment actions on preindictment and noncriminal grounds, in addition to indictments and convictions. | The Committee will decide when it will make inquiries from GSA and DOD. |
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
---|---|---|
Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council | The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council should adopt changes to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) presently under consideration by the councils to: (1) make proposed debarments effective governmentwide; (2) better define affiliation, and require that all prospective contractors certify whether they are affiliated with a suspended or debarred contractor; and (3) extend the coverage of the regulations to include all subcontractors. |
In the July 31, 1987, Federal Register, CAAC and DARC cited GAO report NSIAD-87-37BR, and invited comments on proposed changes to FAR. GAO/OGC commented on September 25, 1987. FAR changes were made in April 1988.
|
Civilian Agency Acquisition Council | The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council should adopt changes to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) presently under consideration by the councils to: (1) make proposed debarments effective governmentwide; (2) better define affiliation, and require that all prospective contractors certify whether they are affiliated with a suspended or debarred contractor; and (3) extend the coverage of the regulations to include all subcontractors. |
In the July 31, 1987, Federal Register, CAAC and DARC cited GAO report NSIAD-87-37BR, and invited comments on proposed changes to FAR. The GAO Office of General Counsel (OGC) commented on September 25, 1987. FAR changes were made in April 1988.
|
Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council | For those deficiencies that are not currently being addressed, the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council should adopt changes to FAR to alleviate these problems. These would require that contractor hearings be carried out under a uniform set of procedures and the regulations covering the continuation and termination of existing contracts be clarified. FAR should also be amended to define to what extent procurement orders placed under optional contractual arrangements, such as nonmandatory multiple awards schedules and basic ordering agreements, are to be considered contracts for the purpose of FAR suspension and debarment provision 9.405-1. |
DOD commented on the report on December 4, 1987.
|
Civilian Agency Acquisition Council | For those deficiencies that are not currently being addressed, the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council should adopt changes to FAR to alleviate these problems. These would require that contractor hearings be carried out under a uniform set of procedures and the regulations covering the continuation and termination of existing contracts be clarified. FAR should also be amended to define to what extent procurement orders placed under optional contractual arrangements, such as nonmandatory multiple awards schedules and basic ordering agreements, are to be considered contracts for the purpose of FAR suspension and debarment provision 9.405-1. |
DOD commented on the report on December 4, 1987, and concurred, or partially concurred, with most of this recommendation.
|
Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council | The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council should amend FAR to require that each government procurement contract contain a clause which states that the government may terminate the contract under default conditions if the contractor is debarred during the course of the contract because of a conviction of a crime or a civil judgement for fraud in connection with the award or the performance of any government contract. The clause should specify that the decision to terminate be made only by the procuring agency head or a designee. |
DOD commented on the report on December 7, 1987; however, it did not agree with this recommendation.
|
Civilian Agency Acquisition Council | The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council should amend FAR to require that each government procurement contract contain a clause which states that the government may terminate the contract under default conditions if the contractor is debarred during the course of the contract because of a conviction of a crime or a civil judgement for fraud in connection with the award or the performance of any government contract. The clause should specify that the decision to terminate be made only by the procuring agency head or a designee. |
DOD commented on the report on December 4, 1987.
|
Full Report
Public Inquiries
Topics
Agency proceedingsContract performanceContract terminationContractor debarmentDefense procurementFederal agenciesFraudProcurement practicesSuspension and debarmentGovernment procurement