On August 26, 2026, President Trump issued Executive Order 14421, Declaring a National Emergency to Secure the United States Bulk-Power System. The Order establishes a new national security regulatory framework for a broad range of equipment, software, services, and supply chain relationships associated with the U.S. electric grid. Although the Order is framed as a grid security measure, its implications extend well beyond utilities.

Equipment manufacturers, project developers, utilities, contractors, lenders, investors, data center operators, and others participating in the energy sector may all be affected. The Order introduces new restrictions and uncertainty into energy infrastructure procurement and supply chains and, critically, it represents a fundamental shift in how the federal government approaches security risks in the energy sector.

Continue Reading The Electric Grid’s ICTS Moment? New National Security Executive Order Targets Foreign-Sourced Energy Equipment

A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) serves as an important reminder that forum selection under the Contract Disputes Act (“CDA”) can have consequences that extend beyond a single appeal. In Gilbane Federal v. United States, 182 Fed. Cl. 177 (2026), the Court transferred a contractor’s claim to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”) even though the contractor could no longer have filed that claim directly at the ASBCA because the CDA’s 90-day appeal period had already expired. The Court concluded nonetheless that transfer was appropriate because a separate appeal related to the same contract was pending before the ASBCA.

The decision highlights two often-overlooked features of CDA litigation. First, forum selection is not simply a matter of choosing between the COFC and the Boards of Contract Appeals for a particular claim. Second, when multiple claims arising from the same contract are litigated in different forums, the COFC has broad authority to consolidate or transfer those disputes in the interest of justice and efficiency.

Continue Reading The Forum You Chose Yesterday May Control the Claim You File Tomorrow

On September 1, 2026, the Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”) Board published two final rules implementing seismic changes to cost accounting requirements for federal government contractors.  The most significant change implements a requirement in last year’s National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”), doubling the dollar value threshold for full coverage under CAS. …

Continue Reading CAS Board Rolls Out Two Changes with Significant Impact on Federal Contractors

The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (“CBCA” or the “Board”) recently issued a stark reminder that discovery misconduct can be case-dispositive.  In Venergy Group, LLC v. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Board dismissed a contractor’s $4.2 million affirmative claim after finding that financial statements produced during discovery had been intentionally manipulated to support larger damages calculations.

Continue Reading Discovery Fraud Comes at a Price: CBCA Dismisses Contractor’s Monetary Claim as a Sanction

On August 20, 2026, the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”) issued a proposed rule that would reset small-business size standards across the economy and a companion white paper proposing a new methodology for calculating them. The proposed rule—Small Business Size Standards, 91 Fed. Reg. 53,741—would establish new size standards for 338 industry groups and industries. The accompanying white paper—Revised Size Standards Methodology, 91 Fed. Reg. 54,096—supplies the analytical framework SBA used to derive the standards in the proposed rule. Notably, SBA calculated the proposed standards using a methodology that is itself out for notice-and-comment, with both comment periods closing the same day, September 21, 2026.

Continue Reading SBA Proposes Overhaul of Size Standards That Would Reclassify Tens of Thousands of Contractors as “Small”

On August 11, 2026, the Small Business Administration issued a final rule that fundamentally alters how individuals may qualify as “socially disadvantaged” under the 8(a) Business Development Program.  Although the final rule largely follows the proposed rule from June 2026, which we previously wrote about here, the SBA added…

Continue Reading SBA Finalizes Changes to the 8(a) Program’s Social Disadvantage Requirements

Earlier this year, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (“DSCA”) issued updated policy guidance implementing a significant expansion of the universe of countries authorized to use Foreign Military Financing (“FMF”) for direct purchases of U.S. defense items.  Previously, only ten countries were eligible for use of FMF for direct commercial contracting…

Continue Reading DSCA Expands FMF Eligibility for Direct Commercial Contracts

A recent Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) decision shows that with the right facts, the government’s failure to award a follow-on Small Business Innovation Research Program (“SBIR”) contract can be challenged at COFC.

In Strategi Consulting, LLC v. United States, the protester, Strategi, alleged that the Air Force improperly failed to award Strategi a Phase III contract for its SBIR work while assigning that Phase III work to other contractors.  The Air Force moved to dismiss, asserting that (1) there was no “procurement” and therefore COFC lacked jurisdiction under the Tucker Act, (2) the protest was barred by the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (“FASA”) because it related to a task order award, and (3) Strategi’s arguments lacked redressability. 

Continue Reading COFC Finds Jurisdiction Over SBIR Protest

Last December, we previewed the significant cost accounting and pricing data disclosure changes contained in the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”), including Section 1804(c)’s increase to the threshold governing the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Statute (formerly the Truth in Negotiations Act, and still commonly called “TINA”).  That change is no longer on the horizon: it is here.  The FY 2026 NDAA was signed into law on December 18, 2025, and the higher TINA threshold has taken effect for contracts entered into after June 30, 2026. This post focuses on what that means, in practical terms, for prime contractors and subcontractors.

Continue Reading The $10 Million TINA Threshold Is Now in Effect: What Contractors and Subcontractors Need to Know

Over the last month, we have issued multiple client alerts outlining developments related to the Chinese military company covered lobbyist prohibition enacted by Section 851 of the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2025, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 4663. This is a follow-up to…

Continue Reading Defense Department Publishes Guidance Page Concerning Restrictions on Defense Contractors Retaining Outside Consultants