Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

bob7947

Root Admin
  • Content count

    1,566
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bob7947

  1. New to Government Contracts

    I edited the original post to remove a proper name.
  2. I'm going to start posting selected non-NDAA contracting legislation so that you may comment on it. This is the first. There is a press release to go with it here.
  3. Three of the 4 sponsors are on the Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce of the House Committee on Small Business. I assume that over this year, there will be a markup in the subcommittee and the probability that it is reported to the full committee. If the sponsors can gain support in the full Committee and report it out of Committee, then it may find its way to the NDAA. A Small Business Committee bill has a better chance of attaching itself to an NDAA, then an individual sponsor's bill.
  4. In 1972, the Commission on Government Procurement wrote that Congress should limit its acquisition legislation to fundamental acquisition matters and let the Executive Branch implement Congress's policy through specific acquisition regulation. If Congress had listened, it would be passing less acquisition legislation, doing a better jub of fulfilling its oversight responsibility of acquisition activities, and the FAR Councils could be performing their regulatory duty to implement Congress's acquisition policies. Unfortunately, Congress didn't listen. Today, Congress doesn't deal with fundamental acquisition matters, it deals with acquisition minutiae and details--especially when it comes to the Department of Defense (DoD). Someone thinks of an idea and before you know Congress is passing another acquisition requirement. Apparently, no thought is too small for another bit of defense acquisition legislation. For the most part, Congress meddles in the acquisition process through the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. These committees propose acquisition legislation in their annual National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA) with much of it in Title VIII of the NDAAs. Title VIII is usually labeled: Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and Related Matters. In the past 17 NDAAs, Congress has passed 725 sections of legislation in Title VIII of the NDAAs. At least another 166 sections of acquisition legislation are included in other Titles of the 17 NDAAs. That's at least 891 sections of acquisition legislation in the past 17 NDAAs. What is worse, Congress is picking up its legislative pace and has passed more sections of acquisition legislation in the past 3 years than ever before. If you have been a follower of Wifcon.com for the past 17 years, you would be familiar with the 17 NDAAs by looking here. Take a look at the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 sections for Title VIII. Do you see coherent acquisition policy? No, you do not! Its a lot of junk legislation patched onto a growing body of junk legislation that is also called Title 10 of the U. S. Code. Don't think you are safe if you are in a civilian agency. Remember, the NDAA is an annual event and during debate on the Senate or House NDAA versions, any stray piece of legislation may attach itself to the NDAA. It's kind of like a tick or leech latching onto you. Take another look at the sticky bomb idea on another of my blog entries. If you throw an amendment at the NDAA during the debate process, it might stick to the NDAA and become law. See if you can identify the source of TITLE XVII that is included in this year's NDAA. I'm getting angry again just thinking about this so I better end here. However, you should get angry too. If you need some incentive to get angry, there are about 250 sections from the last 3 NDAAs waiting for the FAR Councils. I've posted a 9-page article with tables to the Analysis Page with the same name as this blog entry. You can probably see my anger growing with sarcasm as I progress towards the end of that article--see the part on zombie legislation. Some of you are too young to remember the movie Network. However, there is a part of the movie where the character Howard Beale decides he has had enough. I looked at it again this morning.
  5. Carl: If you go down to 1.6 of the HHSAR, you will see a use of COTR and a mention of project officer's appointed by program managers . . . I think it mentioned project officer's acting as COTRs too. It takes some effort to figure it all out. Then HHSAR's part 2 defines COR. I think these supplements contain a mixture of the past and near present ideas.
  6. Many years ago, I tried to standardize the title of a Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) but couldn't get it done. I just noticed a topic about CORs and it reminded me of the various titles for a COR I encountered. I'm going to list a number of the names and acronyms that I remember with the agency that uses or used them. Feel free to correct the ones that I post since some of mine date back to the 1980s and may no longer be used. If the titles for COR's have been standardized by some government rule or regulation, mention that also. I don't remember it happening. If you are a government employee, please list the ones you have heard that agencies currently use. If you are outside of the government, please list the ones you have encountered while you worked in the private sector. Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) - various agencies. Contracting Officer's Representatives (COR) - various agencies Government Technical Representative (GTR), Government Technical Monitor (GTM) - HUD. Project Officer - DHHS
  7. I am providing the following items from the FAR and HUD's agency supplement. The first is from the FAR and discusses an aspect of the FAR System. I think it is self-explanatory. After reading all 3 excerpts, please answer the following question. Do you believe the HUDAR is in compliance with the spirit of the FAR system. Yes or No? The following quote is from the FAR The following quote is from the FAR and defines the COR. The following is from the HUD FAR supplement.
  8. Yeah. My scenario was defective. It's still early in the morning and I didn't sleep.
  9. My ideal case, at this point, would assume something similar to the following: contract manager not defined in any agency supplement and not defined in the contract, defnition of contrating officer's representative (COR) as defined in the FAR, contracting officer, work performed by the contractor at the direction of the contract manager, suit brought by the contractor claiming the contract manager was not a representative of the contracting officer because it was not a COR as defined in the FAR, there is nothing in the contract, etc. It doesn't matter to me that a case is won or lost. What is important is that a case is brought based upon an individual acting as a COR but with a different title. At this point, a case does not matter. It will take me a good amount of time searching for titles and defnitions in FAR supplements. However, there is some hope when you look at the FAR definition of COR that includes a COTR, Carl's 2011 OFPP memo that thinks COTR is gone from the FAR, and FAIs thoughts. I need to show disharmony exists which I am sure it does. There are different title holders acting as CORs out there as this topic shows. I need more than the proliferation of titles. Some day, I might be able to prove there is a detrimental effect of this but that is somewhere in the distant future at this point. And I may never get that far.
  10. I was asking for information about the titles as my original post mentions. Since it is for my own research, I didn't think anyone cared about that. As you realize, titles are nothing more than that---titles. However, they are a good starting point to begin a search--and that is the reason I menioned them in my original post. As you explained, definitions and authorities are what is important. Those definitions may be in FAR suplements and authorities may be spelled out in solicitations. Those sources are free and online. Additionally, years of BCA and court cases are online for free. So, there are documents out there to pursue research on Wifcon.com's budget. I already know my initial steps. Any information provided in this topic, may reduce the time it takes and lead me to further research. The titles I listed in my original post were from memory, as I stated, and date back to the 1980s. While I was looking at the contracts and contract files from that era and from an assortment of agencies, I realized that the different title-holders were performing either the same or similar function. I seem to remember back then that COTR was used more often than COR but that was a long time ago. Many things have changed since then. Back then, it was a victory finding an agency with a COTR, GTR, COR, Project Officer, etc. handbook. What I am looking for in my research is a lot of different titles, performing the same or very similar functions, and causing problems in the contracting process. Any type of disharmony will keep the research alive. I expect I will be done in a year or so, if I feel it is worth continuing.
  11. Yes, I know. Yes, I know. No it doesn't it does exactly what I wanted it to do.
  12. Carl: Part 2 of the FAR includes this definition: “Contracting officer’s representative (COR)” means an individual, including a contracting officer’s technical representative (COTR), designated and authorized in writing by the contracting officer to perform specific technical or administrative functions. The OFPP document from 2011 stated: The term "COTR" is being changed to "COR" to align with the Federal Acquisition Regulation which now incorporates a definition for Contracting Officers Representative andf includes designation of a COR as part of a Contracting Officer's responsibilities. The FAR's definition of Contracting Officer is: “Contracting officer” means a person with the authority to enter into, administer, and/or terminate contracts and make related determinations and findings. The term includes certain authorized representatives of the contracting officer acting within the limits of their authority as delegated by the contracting officer. (emphasis added by me) So a COR or COTR, might become a CO, if the individual is acting within the limits of their authority. Maybe we need another acronym, say CARP-CO, for "certain authorized representatives of the contracting officer acting within the limits of their authority as delegated by the contracting officer. " so as not to get anyone confused. What do you think? Carl: I just saw you included the acronym: GAR which is also a type of fish. I am seeing real possibilities for my suggested acronym CARP-CO.
  13. I've added Government Technical Monitor (GTM) to HUD in my original post. The HUDAR defines the GTM as an assistant to the GTR. I remembered GTM this morning.
  14. Profit

    Sunnyo: Please enter one post in one category for the same item. You posted the same item in 3 different categories the first time and in 2 different categories the second.
  15. How competitive are 1102 jobs?

    Go to the tabs at the top of this page and click Workforce. At the left top, you will see current openings for a variety of contracting fields and internships. I updated them yesterday and the links now work.
  16. Except for the Wifcon Forums and Blogs Pages, the search engine is being replaced on the other pages of Wifcon.com. Since Wifcon.com contains hundreds of pages, the replacement process is being phased in with the Home Page replacement first.
  17. Why is the Govt so cliquish?

    This is one of the most frequently used bits of the Protests Page. FAR 11.002 (a) (1): Requirements - Restrictive provisions
  18. I have added the annual contracting analysis of the National Defense Authorization Bill as it passed Congress. It awaits signature at the White House to become law. However, it will probably be signed.
  19. The internet is a dangerous place. The last time I looked, around 60 percent of the internet traffic is produced by robots. Some of these robots are the typcial search engines looking for information to add to their database--such as google. That allows you to find information in a google search. When you add your e-mail address to a post, that e-mail address goes into the database. The internet also is littered with unfriendly robots looking for e-mail addresses to spam and scam. The e-mail address this forum asks you for during registration are hidden from the public and as long as this software works as it is designed to they are safely hidden. In short, PLEASE do not post your e-mail address in a post. Use the messenger service this software provides and clean your messages often.
  20. Default Clause to extend Period of Performance

    Jamal: If that is so, that is why CO might find case examples helpful. CO asked for a decision to support his/her understanding of clauses and to convince others he/she is correct in his/her reading of clauses. I provided access to decisions of the COFC, ASBCA and CBCA that CO might find useful. I don't know if CO will find those sources useful but CO can decide. Vern's opinion may be a good one--telling "squadron DBO" that if they can't understand the simple English of the clauses to read a book on the subject. Of course, I don't know how "squadron DBO" would react. CO will have to decide on that too.
  21. Default Clause to extend Period of Performance

    Construction CO: In your second post, you wrote: I assume you mean Inspector General auditors or analysts. If so, they are usually generalists who must prove to you that they are correct. They sure don't sound like they are, if what you describe is accurate. You also said: That may require some legal support to educate them. Go Here: U. S. Court of Claims. Where it says keywords, type in the name of your clause and read the cases. For example, "changes clause." Also go here: Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. In the search box to the left, type the name of your clause. You can also use the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals.
  22. I received an e-mail yesterday afternoon that provided a GAO appropriations decision. I've added a link to the decision under the quote. What do you think of the decision? Air Force Reserve Command--Disposable Plates and Utensils, B-329316: Nov 29, 2017
  23. NDAA for FY 2018

    According to Congress.gov, H. R. 2810 was sent to the White House on Novembre 30, 2017.
×