bob7947

Things are moving so quickly that the White House information has been out of date. I knew this happened but it wasn't posted.

What does the award fee plan look like? What are the factors for earning the award?

Thanks. I agree.

Anyone?

I have posted the 20th annual analysis of the National Defense Authorization Act. This one is the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. I've been doing this for 20 years. I'm going to proof it over the next day or two.

It's now law. I'll have it online before Monday.

At this point I have no plans for an app. There are two immediate things on the agenda: The 2021 NDAA analysis which takes several weeks. That wil be done within the week. I also want to post a blog entry on an unrelated issue. A redesign and streamline of the non-discussion board part of the site. I expect that to take some months because there are about 500 to 1,000 pages to that part of the site.

Wifcon Community: Merry Christmas, Happy New Year and a belated Happy Hanukkah. (I've been late or behind all year.) Thank you for participating in Wifcon.com's discussion forum during 2020. You, the participants, make it work and I am grateful for your participation. I have a long list of things to do to improve the overall site during 2021. But first, I'm baking raisin-walnut cookies tonight. Your host, Bob

The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 was vetoed today. Congress will return next week to deal with the bill.

Yes, possible veto and then override. It won't affect any new Congressional perfections to contracting law. Then a few days to get the Public Law number.

I plan on doing it again by the end of December 2020.

That's fine.

I didn't notice that this question was asked twice. I cannot change it now or several useful posts would be deleted. Posting the same message more than once is referred to as spamming.

Joel: Time will tell.

From trying to remember over a decade or so, the Councils like to group final and interim rules in a FAC. I do list proposed rules in the bottom right column and add the final rules to the issued FACs as they are included in FACs. If any are made final and not included in FACs, I shift the Final rule to the left hand column. The simple answer is that making a rule final without a FAC is done much less often. It is my belief that fewer FACs have been issued over the past several years. If there are no FACs to tie a final rule to as in 2018-005, they just make it final without one. In this case the rule was nearing 3 years old. By the way, there are some items that I am not updating at this time. (I'm saving the information.) The reason is that I have a new souped-up computer with web-site software and I am planning to design and update the non-discussion forum part of the site. I think there are about 500 to 1,000 pages to that part of the site and the update will eliminate some of the rarely used pages. Other pages will look more better. With that much content, it is like turning the Titanic.

It is in FAR Case 2018-005. This is the proposed version. The Final version was dated 7/2/2020. The DoD Deviation was 2018-00012. The NDAA became law in December 2017.

Joel: There are nearly 500 footnotes too. Maybe Briefing Papers should rename it to Detailed Tome.

Joel: Let's stretch this out further and add something more to the Briefing Papers which explains the process. On it's p. 3, the Paper mention's there are 3 BCAs. I know of a 4th - GAO's Contract Appeals Board.

See the CBCA dispute: JAF Supply, Inc., CBCA 6934, November 16, 2020.

What would not be included in the proposed "economic price adjustment."

Some news that I posted to the Home Page tonight. Fiscal Year 2020 Reporting Period Extended for Contractor Service Contract Reporting in the System for Award Management.

In the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Appeals Court heard an appeal of two claims in which the Court of Federal Claims issued opinions on a bid protest. The Appeals Court sent one opinion on one claim back to the Claims Court for a further look. The protest involved something a bit different (qualified parts list) and deals with the terms "in connection with a procurement or a proposed procurement" and "interested party." The decision/opinion of the Appeals Court and the Claims Court are below. LAX Electronics, Inc. (dba) Automatic Connector, 2020-1498, November 3, 2020. LAX Electronics, Inc.,(dba) Automatic Connector, No. 19-1668C, December 17, 2019.

H-2-H: Is this it. I think it is worth reading. I haven't done a thorough reading of the decision but it appears that the COFC backed down because of a "novel" ruling by the CAFC.

In the Court of Federal Claims: Savantage Financial Services, Inc. v. U. S., No. 19-1805C, October 26, 2020