Jump to content

civ_1102

Members
  • Posts

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by civ_1102

  1. Scenario: A CO is preparing to execute a single-award IDIQ contract in September 2010. However, the period of performance begins, and the contract effective date, is 1 October 2010. I am well aware of the requirement that funds at least equal to the minimum guarantee need to be obligated when signing an IDIQ in order to not violate the anti-deficiency act. However, in this case, the PoP is solely in FY2011, even though the contract will be signed in FY2010. Clearly, FY2011 funds are not available yet for obligation. If FY2010 funds were to be used to meet the minimum order, it would be a violation of the Bona Fide needs rule. Thus, as I see it, the CO would either be anti-deficient or be violating the bona fide needs rule. Would making the award Subject to the Availability of Funds resolve this? Is there some better solution?
  2. Correct..I phrased that inartfully, my intentions were to say that those are the primary contract types that permit flexibility on quantity if you have a supply contract.
  3. Whether or not a change is within scope has nothing to do with whether a change is issued unilaterally or bilaterally. In essence, a bilateral change is no different than the CO ordering a change unilaterally through the changes clause except that, when doing it bilaterally, you are getting agreement on the price, and any other terms and conditions of the change, up front. As a general rule, unless you have an IDIQ, requirements, or other indefinite quantity type contract, adding additional supply quantities is not going to be in scope.
  4. "Why did the FAR Council decide to make "leased" property = Government property? Seems to me, the only way that would make sense is if they further specified that what they meant was "leased-to-own" property would be Government property. For a simple lease, with no mechanism for passing title to the Government, I can't fathom how such leased property could be considered Government property. Thoughts?" gov2310, I think you are missing the point of that part of the definition. I believe property leased by the Gov't is to be considered Gov't property largely for the purpose of liability. E.g., if a contractor providing admin. support on a fixed-price basis totally breaks a photocopier that the Government is leasing from say Ricoh, then the regs. want the contractor to be liable for destroying that property. It is not a mater relating to title, etc.
  5. A main trick with TAA (Trade Agreements Act) is how much are you buying? If your contracting activity is in the supply business (say managing federal supply schedule contracts or DLA) you are going to worry about TAA quite a bit. If you are just buying onsies and towsies of say office supplies once in awhile, it is not likely that you are crossing over the TAA thresholds. And if you buy through GSA, they have already complied (in theory) with TAA, as applicable. I myself have only had one position where TAA was ever applicable, and it was with the GSA Global Supply program (buying the goods in bulk that you get through the GSA supply catalog).
  6. Just out of curiosity, you said you were doing a competitive 8(a). Even if your agency has an MOU with SBA allowing the agency to conduct the competition directly, you still generally need to have SBA verify the 8(a) eligibility before you award the contract. Did you do that? If so, was the issue of the offeror's size not reviewed by SBA when verifying 8(a) eligibility?
  7. As someone who has recent DOE experience, this was not a surprising outcome at all. There is a culture at many DOE field offices whereby procurement processes are driven not by trying to conduct good business, but by overly-literal reading of applicable rules and regulations. I could only venture what happened here is that the CO's procurement attorney advised them that no debrief was required and the CO did not grow a pair and go off and do what made sense...
  8. Does anyone have any experience regarding how long DOL typically takes to perform an EEO review? Is there any reason a request for one could not be done once a competitive range is issued or must it wait until a source selection decision is made?
  9. Thanks to all. I knew that I was ok in terms of establishing a competitive range. My question was more relating to whether or not I could exclude offerors from the range for the purpose of efficiency. But I believe the RFP must state the Government's intent to do that, which my RFP did not.
  10. No, the total value is over the commercial test program threshold. The RFP neglected to add any additional FAR 15 language beyond what is incorporated into the FAR 12 clauses.
  11. Scenario: Government issues an RFP under FAR proceduers for services. The RFP included FAR 52.212-1, indicating that award without discussions is contemplated but discussions can be held if necessary. It is now necessary to hold discussions. Even though the RFP does not contain the FAR 15 competitive range language, when establishing a competitive range to conduct discussions, would it still be acceptable to establish "a competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. "?
  12. I am getting ready to identify that apparent succesfull offeror under a competitive 8(a) procurement over $3.5 million. My agency has an MOU with SBA allowing us to issue awards directly to the 8(a) company. However, the MOU requires that we give SBA 5 days to determine eligibility of the awardee. In this case, I think there may be a responsibility issue. Under an 8(a) procurement, can I request a COC from SBA or are the regulations different for the 8(a) program regarding this matter.
  13. Thanks for the comments, all. In the hypothetical case, the offeror in question is not necessarily in line for award (we don't know as the technical eval. is not completed). However, we are on a tight schedule and wanted to see what our options were in the event the one offeror with the potential OCI ended up being the prospective awardee.
  14. Hypothetical situation: 1. An RFP for commercial item support services is issued. Award without discussions is contemplated in the RFP. Instructions to offerors makes no mention of OCIs. 2. An offer that is otherwise free of significant weaknesses presents a significant OCI issue revealed only through presentation of a past performance reference. 3. Is there any legal or regulatory reason I cannot merely consider this a significant weakness or deficiency and therefore not consider the offeror for award due to the OCI?
  15. "Okay, I've read the applicable CFR's. However, since there is no regulatory guidance in the FAR, DFARS, etc., why are we beholden to SBA's assertion that; "It has always been SBA's policy, and implicit in the regulations, that once a requirement is awarded as an 8(a) contract, any follow-on procurement should generally also be awarded as an 8(a) contract."" One other issue to bear in mind is that many agencies have an MOU with SBA that permits the agency to conduct 8(a) acquisitions directly, rather than working through SBA. Such MOU's may require to keep a requirement in 8(a) unless SBA otherwise agrees.
  16. No-the PWS/SOW for each instant requirement must specify the required qualifications for contractor personnel. Why would common sense dictate that they are the same? If the Government wants an 1102, they should post a vacancy on usajobs.gov, if they want a contractor, they should use a contractor.
  17. Those are my thoughts too. I just wanted to see if there were any decisions I could use to further make my point to an upset business concern.
  18. Some agencies require that CO's post actual RFP documents on third-party sites (such as FedConnect), with only a brief set of information and a link posted to FBO. Does anyone know of any protest decisions relating to this practice? Thank you
  19. Are you thinking of the DFARS clauses prohibiting excessive pass-through charges? See DFARS 252.215-7003 and 252.215-7004.
  20. Don't worry too much...same stuff, different year.
  21. I should add that under guidance issued by OFPP last year, there are certain processes that you are obliged to folllow when going on a route like this. You can read it here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement/...iac_revised.pdf
  22. Some options are: -GSA Assisted Acquisition Services (www.gsa.gov/aas ) -DOI Acquisition Services Directorate (www.aqd.nbc.gov) -HHS Program Support Center (www.psc.gov) Those are the major programs I know of on the civilian side. With regard to DoD, I am not sure if any agency in DoD really is offers contracting support "for sale" on a large-scale basis anymore. There are some DoD offices that do a lot of acquisition support for other DoD activities (Army Center of Contracting Excellence and Washington Headquarters Services). I cannot comment much on the quality of work that any of these places do on a for-hire basis. I can tell you that the DOI place used to be called "GovWorks," until they got raked over the coals for a variety of improper practices...so they changed their name.
  23. Well then assuming that your RFP contained the provision for it, tell the offeror that they will need to submit information other than cost/pricing data in the form ofpayroll documents etc and that if they do not provide it, you will be unable to issue an award to them. Second, I would challenge your agency policy through appropriate channels. Ask them if the risk involved with awarding an SBIR phase I on a FFP basis is truly worth the administrative expense of the analysis that they are requiring?
  24. Are actually doing a Phase I SBIR on a CPFF basis? That is probably your first mistake. Be that as it may, if you are using a contract type where you are required to perform cost realism or cost analysis (as it sounds like may be the case), you could proceed by informing the prospective contractor that you cannot complete your analysis without this information and they will therefore not get an award. That might convicne them to provide you with the data you need. Regarding DCAA, if this company has never had their rates audited, I strongly doubt DCAA is going to give you any help on a $100,000 SBIR phase I award. And if they do, expect to wait awhile.
  25. One of the first questions I was asked for my current position was, "How would you handle violence in the workplace?"...made me chuckle, but sadly, they were being serious!
×
×
  • Create New...