joel hoffman

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About joel hoffman

  • Rank
    P.E., DBIA

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Following God, Family, Sailing, Motorcycling, Hunting, Volleyball; Acquisition, Source Selections, Contract Administration, Construction, Design-Build Construction, mods, claims, TFD, TFC, project controls,

Recent Profile Visitors

23,043 profile views
  1. Thanks, Vern. In the situation I described, I believe that the individual claimed that they were aware of leaking 55 gallon drums, etc. They were planning to take action but the plan was unfunded. Didn't matter - arrested for criminal violations.
  2. Would liability insurance cover illegal, criminal activities of government employees? I believe that the subject case here concerns qualified immunity for a civil suit. Does liability insurance cover legal costs for a civil servant that is denied qualified immunity from civil actions related to their on-duty actions ? In the mid 1990's, a former Army civil service employee, who was a senior supervisory official at Aberdeen Proving Grounds or at Edgewood Arsenal, spoke at a Mobile, Alabama Post meeting of the Society of American Military Engineers. He recounted his story of how he was prosecuted and convicted for personal felony criminal violations of various federal anti-pollution laws such as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (see Section 6001). He was fined, served time in Federal prison and lost his job. The violations were for improper storage of leaking hazardous and toxic waste materials on Army property. The Army was aware or should have been aware of leaking containers and old systems for chemical weapons materials. His presentation was meant to warn government employees that they can be held personally liable for criminal violations of Hazardous Waste laws and that the government could not provide or pay for legal defense of criminal violations by US Government employees due to their employment.
  3. Is the duration of the suspension of work for a definite period or is it for an indefinite/ unknown period? Is the KO trying to pre-price the impact of the suspension? If the suspension is for an indeterminate period, I don't think that you can pre-price "unabsorbed home office overhead" because you don't necessarily know before hand if you can or can't divert your resources to other projects or contracts to absorb such overhead. If the suspension is for a definite period, you would be lacking one of the prerequisites for recovery of unabsorbed home office overhead. The suspension generally must have been for an indeterminate period of time that precluded you from reassigning resources to other jobs, such as backlog of work or other new work. EDIT: as a minimum at this point, if the government has not stated a period of suspension (dumb) , you could put them on notice that you are reserving the right to claim unabsorbed home office overhead if you are unable to divert your resource to other work and if you are expected to remain ready to remobilize and resume work upon notice. Recommend rEading up on the prerequisites to establish entitlement to UHOO. Im teaching class this week so don't have time to elaborate much.
  4. An industry coalition, including the Associated General Contractors (AGC), is trying to get legislation introduced yet again to prohibit reverse auctions for construction contracts.
  5. Deleted oops thought I was texting my wife about my flight.
  6. Before their more recent methods described in links above, the Air Force used a method called "Past Performance - Price Tradeoff" or "PPT" for several years on (at least) construction projects under Part 15 source selections. They might still be using it. I don't know. There don't seem to be any AF posters in the Forum who have joined in on previous discussions concerning AF source selection processes but if there are, perhaps they will chime in on their experiences with PPT. You are free to search for GAO protest decisions on acquisitions that used that methodology. I'm guessing that they have begun using the method described in the link above to simplify the SS evaluation process.
  7. See, for instance: See, for instance:
  8. There are several organizations that use "past performance" and price as evaluation factors. Some use a tradeoff. Others use a phased approach where they look for the lowest reasonably price offer from a firm with "exceptional" or similar past performance (like "substantial confidence", etc.) There are past discussion threads in this forum about those approaches. They have withstood protests. Yes, there can be other indicators, which might or might not be of interest to an organization for a type of acquisition.
  9. Help, yes, I was asking who else should do it (the functions that I mentioned) if the FAR Council or DAR council were done away with. That's all I wanted to initially know. Sorry if that wasn't clear enough I wasn't presuming that they are either competent or incompetent.
  10. But why cant the information I discussed above be revealed to the public? For that matter, why is the debriefing more restrictive than what would be in a bid abstract? The statute discusses the MINIMUM items for inclusion in a debriefing.
  11. Help, my post didn't presume anything. I asked - Who should maintain, coordinate and update the FAR for congressional mandates, currency of $ limits, thresholds, etc., or other needed updates? Who should coordinate between Congress and agencies to look at some of the GOOFY proposed legislation that gets introduced or that some Congressional member's staffers are trying to write for their constituents or the Beltway Lobbyists? Perhaps your post presumes that nobody should perform those functions.
  12. So, who should maintain, coordinate and update the FAR for congressional mandates, currency of $ limits, thresholds, etc., or other needed updates. Who should coordinate between Congress and agencies to look at some of the GOOFY proposed legislation that gets introduced or that some Congressional member's staffers are trying to write for their constiuents or the Beltway Lobbyists? I've seen some really dumb stuff that organizations will try to get introduced that they don't know will affect a lot more than their specific concern or will have ripple impacts.
  13. But if the same procurement could be conducted as an IFB (although likely not), the prices would be publicly available. I think that it is mainly based upon ones perspective. If you've never been involved in anything other than methods conducted under the cloak of secrecy, you might think everything was a "trade secret". Why can't the identities of all proposers and their prices be revealed in a debriefing and better yet - to the public - after the award? That is routinely reported in trade publications for public construction contracts. Those that participate in open processes, including the low bidder, have long accepted the fact that their line item prices will be available for review.. I wonder, how services and supplies were procured years ago before negotiated acquisition.
  14. OK, thanks, Pat. Then it looks like the government changed the terms of the contract. There was no meeting of the minds. Submit a claim.
  15. Pat wants to know how how to "push back" to the government but doesn't seem to want to clarify when or how the statement in the CLIN was included that says "hours are estimated and payment will only be made for actual hours worked" . Was it BEFORE or AFTER Pat's company submitted their proposal? I know that Pat has been viewing this thread within the past 7 hours, including a post just now.