Lawyers Claim Contractor Self-Reporting Rule Too Vague

Government Executive reports that private sector lawyers are complaining about the new FAR provision requiring contractors to report on fraud, bribery, conflicts of interest, false claims or improper gratuities discovered in conjunction with government contracts:

During a webinar on Tuesday, Reed Smith LLP attorneys Lorraine Campos and Steven Tibbets highlighted a list of terms that are not defined in the regulation, such as "full cooperation," "timely" and "credible evidence." While these terms have common-sense meanings, their legal definitions are vague, the attorneys said. For example, full cooperation includes providing timely and complete responses to government auditor or investigator requests for documents and access to employees with information, but a comprehensive definition is not provided. The original draft of the rule required contractors to report violations when they had "reasonable grounds to believe" one had been committed. During the rule-making process that language was changed to mandate disclosure if there was "credible evidence" of a violation. But the final rule did not define credible evidence, leaving legal advisers to assume the change indicated regulators were willing to let contractors investigate allegations before reporting them to inspectors general.

Edited March 5 to correct typo.