Casius Farman

I am somewhat familiar with the guidance in FAR, but would be interested in hearing what WIFCON participants are doing in this area.

To the best of my recollection, the Alpha character designates the Audit team within the FAO that is assigned to this audit review.

Sorry, That should have been Vern!

Thank you, Verne!

To my recollection, there is an ASBCA case related to DCAA having acces to Contractor's Internal Audit reports. I believe it involved Martin Marietta, Co. If anyone is familiar with the case, and could point me in a direction where I might locate it, I would be grateful. And yes, I did Google it before posting here.

If any one has a recommendation where I might obtain a quick tutorial on joint ventures, I would appreciate it if they would respond with either an attachment, or a cite where I might research this topic. While I understand that this is a complex area, I would like to become minimally conversant on the subject in a short time frame. Thanks in advance for any forthcoming information and/or advice.

It seems to me that there is a serious need for some housecleaning in the Finance Department!!

Mr. Edwards, Thank you!! While this is excellent feedback, it addresses whether or not the "findings", as the result of having performed a DP review, are significant. I have a recollection that DCAA had some manner of a Matrix or decision tool they used to determine if a particular contract award was even worthy of bothering to do a review. Does anyone else have similar rememberances?

I believe that any contract containing the TINA clause has a potential to be reviewed for Defective Pricing. However, as a practical matter I would expect that only those contracts, where DCAA has determined there may be a significant risk to the government, have a realistic chance of being selected for audit. I have a vague recollection that there was once a threshhold used by DCAA in determining which contracts they would or would not review for Defective Pricing. I am hoping that someone may be as old as I am, and has this same notion, and that it is a reality, and not the musings of a weathered old ex-auditor. Any insight would be greatly appreciated

A client asked the following question, and I am seeking the benefit of Wifcon members/guests with the same topic: Contractor A is the Prime on a DOD construction contract taking place in the ME Subcontractor 123 has proposed, and is using, billing & being paid for certain foreign construction materials under an exception to the Buy American Act Subcontractor 987 (Client) proposed the same foreign construction materials, however they have been told by the contracting officer that they cannot have a waiver. As a practical matter, I am under the impression that the government would have a contractual relationship with the Prime, and that the Subcontractors would have a similar relationship with the Prime. The client's question was: if the other subcontractor can be paid for the foreign materials then why couldn't they be granted a similar exception? It is established that the materials in question are not available from any American sources, and they are going to have to "eat" the cost of these materials in order to fulfill their obligations under the subcontract, unless they are allowed to have an exception under the Buy American Act. Any help would be greatly appreciated.