Procurement Integrity Act CONTRACTING OFFICER INVESTIGATIONS by LT. COL. MICHAEL J. DAVIDSON, USA (RET.). S.J.D.
D uring the pre-award phase of a procurement, the contracting officer (CO) learns that a member of the program office provided sensitive procurement information to a potential vendor. What should, or can, the CO do under such circumstances?
Unauthorized disclosures of sensi- tive procurement information occur under various circumstances. Senior officials may demand a briefing from evaluation teams about ongoing pro- curements; sensitive matters may be discussed around unauthorized parties; COs may accidently dis- close source selection information to competing vendors; and federal employees might provide informa- tion to vendors for personal profit or because they aren’t well versed in the rules. This article focuses on the CO’s obligations following such improper
disclosures that may constitute vio- lations of the Procurement Integrity Act (PIA). The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) imposes an affirmative require- ment on the CO to inquire into poten- tial PIA violations and their impacts even though COs are not trained investigators and the FAR takes an entirely different approach to the CO role on matters involving fraud. FAR 33.210 stresses that a CO is not authorized to settle, compromise, pay, or adjust “any claim involving fraud.” Furthermore, the FAR gener-
ally requires that the CO report mat- ters involving fraud. For example, FAR 33.209 states that “If the contractor is unable to support any part of the claim and there is evidence that the inability is attributable to misrepre- sentation of fact or to fraud on the part of the contractor, the contract- ing officer shall refer the matter to the agency official responsible for investigating fraud.” Similarly, if a Termination CO (TCO) suspects fraud when settling a terminated contract, FAR 49.106 requires the TCO to “discontinue ne-
44 | DEFENSE ACQUISITION | November-December 2025
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker