Stay updated with breaking news from Aspen consulting. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Experts involved in the SOSA Consortium and the standard’s development will discuss the elements of conformance to the Technical Standard, how...
Multiple intelligence (Multi-INT), sometimes referred to as multi modality, is a popular term used in recent years to describe C5ISR [command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] applications in which data obtained from disparate sensing sources is fused together to derive new information and operational insights. In some cases, this can mean the fusion of SIGINT [signals intelligence] data and radar data, or SIGINT data with EW [electronic warfare] data and EO/IR [electro-optical/infrared] data. In other cases, it may mean combining real-time data with post-mission analysis from previously processed data. Additionally, there are approaches where artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) assist via data and information analysis to identify patterns or predict outcomes.
In this fifth semiannual installment, we have packed up the notable Contract Disputes Act claims litigation decisions coming out of the Federal Circuit, Court of Federal Claims, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, and...
Contractors are well aware that they cannot rely on the apparent authority of government officials. Under Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 (1947), only an authorized...
The Federal Circuit ruled Wednesday that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers materially breached a contract by making payments to a bank account other than the one specifically designated, even with the blessing of a senior executive for the contractor.
Inc., 13 the ASBCA rejected the contractor's attempt to escape default arising from the contractor's admitted nonperformance after the government exercised its offset right. No dispute existed that the government had terminated the contract because the contractor failed to deliver the specified equipment by the contractually required delivery date. The contractor nevertheless argued unsuccessfully that the government should have excused the nonperformance of its subcontractor due to lack of payment because the government had withheld payments to the prime contractor based on problems the prime had experienced on a separate contract—effectively exercising its offset right. The board held that the default
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: A recent decision out of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals serves as a useful reminder that the rules regarding apparent authority in contracting apply differently to government employees than to government contractors. In 2013, Aspen Consulting, LLC entered into a contract with the government. Aspen Consulting, LLC, ASBCA No. 6112, 20-1 BCA ¶ 37,715. Benjamin French, Aspen Consulting’s vice-president and chief operating officer, was designated as the project manager and day-to-day point of contact for that contract. Mr. French did not have any authority to enter into contracts on his own, independently investigate or propose change orders, or execute contract modifications without approval. Despite this, Mr. French signed contract documents on behalf of Aspen Consulting, and Aspen Consulting never told the government that Mr. French only had limited contractual authority.