The new year isn’t starting out well for at least one contractor who just agreed to settle a False Claims Act case alleging that he submitted multiple false bids from two controlled companies and bribed other companies to do the same.  Although this example is extreme, commercial item contractors need to be aware that the federal enforcement community is taking a long look at whether competitive practices, including those that many consider to be established commercial procedures, reduce competition and result in the government paying higher prices.  The current case, per a January 3^rd DOJ press release, involves two Maintenance, Repair, and Operations (MRO) contractors controlled by the same person.  Johnny Buscema Jr. of New Port Richey, Florida, and his companies, S.A.F.E. Structure Designs, based in Las Vegas, and U.S.A. Manufacturing were the two cited in the press release.  DOJ alleges that Buscema submitted non-competitive bids, paid other vendors to submit non-competitive bids, and submitted multiple bids from his own two companies on the same solicitations to assist the prime vendor in meeting its obligation to obtain bids from two or three vendors and make the bids appear more competitive.  Although the settlement amount is only $1 million, no contractor should take solace in that.  First, that amount was set based on what DOJ believed could reasonably be recovered.  Larger companies would face higher monetary penalties.  Second, Buscema likely had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending against the case, in addition to lost productivity an, third, quite likely, a reduced opportunity for subsequent DLA MRO awards.  Companies submitting bids for the same OEM solutions should take care to ensure that there isn’t even the appearance of bid rigging or discouraging competition.  No one wants to start the year over $1M behind.