Jump to content

joel hoffman

Members
  • Posts

    7,054
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by joel hoffman

  1. agreed. This is in response to the original question : “...is there any [1] rule or otherwise [2] practical constraint, stopping me from incorporating as many clauses into the contract as I can [“as you want”, per title of this thread] whether I think they'll be applicable or not? “ Answer: [1] Rule: For FAR clauses, use the FAR Matrix. Read the prescription for each provision or clause possibly applicable to the contract type. Comply with said prescriptions. There are reasons why there are prescriptions for WRITING contract solicitations, not for sorting them out during the solicitation period or after award. [2] Practical constraint(s): If one simply puts clauses in the contract without any knowledge of what they are for or what they mean, how would you know how to administer a contract? How would you expect someone else to know? How could you know whether the contractor is in compliance with the contract? How would a contractor know what is applicable? How will they price their quote or proposal for a contract,’? Wouldn’t you expect them to be as confused as you are, thus possibly consider adding contingencies to their pricing? Do you think that indiscriminately including clauses to avoid the possibility that you miss some exhibits professionalism??? IMO, that would make the government, the “specialist”, the KO, the “specialist’s” “supervisor”(?) and the administrators look like dumbasses and rightly so. Do you want yourself and the rest of those involved in the contracting process to appear to be lazy? IMO, it may likely appear that whoever wrote the solicitation is ignorant, lazy and indifferent to the possible ramifications of the inclusion of inapplicable clauses and provisions. Whoever has to administer the contract for both parties would have to sort what the actual contract requirements are. Talk about waste of time and resources and abuse!!!! Sorry if this is too harsh for a beginner. However, one must learn the job that the taxpayers are paying them to do. There is a difference between a “clerk” and a “specialist”. After all, you are DRAFTING a significant portion of a GOVERNMENT CONTRACT. Do it in a responsible, professional manner. if your supervisory and management let’s you get away with what you state that you would like to , shame on them. Don’t make yourself or them appear to be nincompoops. I made it clear to my supervisors throughout the years that it was part of my job to make the organization and them “look good”. That included providing feedback...
  2. Is there a college bookstore near you? I bought my Fourth Edition at the University of Alabama at Huntsville Bookstore.A University with a Law School should have it. Should be available at list price.
  3. https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/store/product/administration-of-government-contracts-fifth-edition/
  4. Good point for a sole source negotiated acquisition. But if a proposed term or condition conflicts with another aspect of a competitive government RFP, it may be non-conforming, unawardable without discussions.
  5. What’s not true? We were compensated by earning comp time off with pay. Our travel time was charged to the project we were working on at the burdened hourly rates. After all, it’s paid time off. https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-administration/fact-sheets/compensatory-time-off-for-travel/ At any rate, my point is that I don’t have a fundamental problem with paying for non-commuting travel time on a Sunday or nights, etc. if the government requires the contractor to travel on nights or weekends, unless the contract forbids it. If the trip costs were being negotiated for some reason on a FFP contract and there was no additional cost to the contractor, there was no cost to reimburse.
  6. Dribbling out details and drooling different scenarios as the conversation develops. Doesn’t the CAGE/DUNS have to match that of the official contractor?
  7. The government now compensates its salaried government employees for travel time outside normal duty hours. Before the late 90’s or early 2000’s, we travelled on weekends and evenings without any compensation. But if a contractor doesn’t compensate salaried employees for outside hours, contractor has no costs for such outside hours.
  8. As I said, the purpose for the machine may well be for construction. If the operator came with the machine, the operator would then be under the DB Act. As it is, they are renting construction equipment -no operator - no service being performed by a service employee.
  9. I thought that ji expressed what a service is pretty well. I was being facetious.
  10. Sheesh. Maybe a robot operator cones with the backhoe. Maybe it is construction work...
  11. What are the circumstances for the extension? Is it under a clause such as 52.217-8 Option To Extend Services.
  12. Thanks for the information, Retreadfed. In my response to another post above, I was trying to be diplomatic. A Government employee should not be advising contractors to include costs in their proposal that are expressly unallowable. There is a difference between deliberately insisting upon an unallowable cost and attempting to negotiate the terms of the contract to allow it. If the term is negotiable, that fine. If it isn’t, then the government negotiator should explain that and not jack up his/her overall settlement position to reach agreement. The cost principles are just that - “principles”.
  13. I do believe that the parties may institute in scope changes to future optional line items. Then the government can exercise those already modified options at the appropriate time. For instance, if an in-scope change will affect every option year’s efforts similarly, the parties would be wise to implement the change to all of the affected option CLINs, rather than having to implement the same change each time an option is exercised. Thus, the key is whether or not the change is “in-scope” or not.
  14. Not sure of your point but the government has the unilateral right whether or not to add work or time that is addressed in an option. The contractor normally has no choice to decline as long as there are no changes to the terms and conditions. There may be circumstances (some of which ARE addressed in the FAR as I explained earlier) where the parties should or must bilaterally agree to adjustments for various reasons but not to “repricing”. The government doesn’t have the unilateral right to “exercise” an option that is different than that which was proposed, evaluated and accepted in a competitively awarded proposal. Yes- of course- if the ultimately added work or period is out of scope of the contract or scope of competition, an exception from full and open competition pursuant to CICA is necessary and requires a supplemental agreement.
  15. My question related to a bilateral agreement resulting from a voluntary price reduction offered to avoid losing the option when the government’s required market research before exercising an option reveals that current pricing would be more advantageous than the option prices. . i quickly scanned through my old 3rd edition of Formation of Government Contracts yesterday. I didn’t have time to search for the referenced decisions but it appeared that the GAO may question a voluntary price reduction under the Competition in Contracting Act as affecting the Scope of the Competition. Too busy today to research it. From reading some other articles, I doubt that the GAO would rule for the government in a Protest by another original competitor or by industry. I think it would be considered out of scope, under the circumstances (the reason for the price reduction). Having said that, my gut feeling is that a contractor could offer a voluntary price reduction, provided that the motive isn’t based upon influencing the government to award an option. But - I’m not talking about a unilateral “exercise” of an option. Strictly bilateral - the issue is one of in-scope or out-of-scope.
  16. Not sure of the circumstances here. If you are negotiating a contract,, you can certainly negotiate the terms of the clause. If an existing GSA schedule contract disallows G&A on travel, then it isn’t allowed.
  17. Yes, I also agree. In addition, the government can choose to implement it bilaterally as I described above, with changes as needed. But not reprice it for market conditions, etc.* * Can the contractor offer a voluntary price reduction for say, supplies that the government can purchase elsewhere for less, in order not to lose the option?
  18. ."Please define “exercise”. Thanks. EDIT: An “option” provides the government a unilateral right, for a specified time, to elect to [or elect not to] purchase additional supplies or services called for by the contract, or [an option may provide the government a unilateral right to elect to or elect not] to extend the term of the contract. However, if there has been a change or economic price adjustment applies, or some other factor requires a “”change” to the price or the work, etc. the parties may or should bilaterally agree to the change or adjustment. See for instance, FAR 17.207(b). See, for example: ”52.217-6 Option for Increased Quantity. As prescribed in 17.208(d), insert a clause substantially the same as the following: Option for Increased Quantity (MAR 1989) The Government may increase the quantity of supplies called for in the Schedule at the unit price specified. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within ____ [insert in the clause the period of time in which the Contracting Officer has to exercise the option]. Delivery of the added items shall continue at the same rate as the like items called for under the contract, unless the parties otherwise agree. (End of clause)” See, for example: “52.217-7 Option for Increased Quantity—Separately Priced Line Item. As prescribed in 17.208(e), insert a clause substantially the same as the following: Option for Increased Quantity—Separately Priced Line Item (MAR 1989) The Government may require the delivery of the numbered line item, identified in the Schedule as an option item, in the quantity and at the price stated in the Schedule. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within ____ [insert in the clause the period of time in which the Contracting Officer has to exercise the option]. Delivery of added items shall continue at the same rate that like items are called for under the contract, unless the parties otherwise agree. (End of clause)”
  19. Yes , a lack of knowledge of business practices. I thought that KO’s are supposed to have a business education background . Sheesh.
  20. In government employees’ zeal to provide maximum flexibility to the government to exercise an option, they need to remember to consider how the contractor can plan for continuation and how to price their proposal to cover themselves if the government waits til it affects the contractors’ cost or employee retention to exercise an option. Contractor employees have needs too, for you to consider.
  21. 17.204 (c) says:” The period shall be set so as to provide the contractor adequate lead time to ensure continuous production.” One can’t simply write anything they want, without considering how to provide the contractor adequate lead time to ensure continuous production . One shouldn’t simply insert a number of days, without providing context to those days and without providing adequate lead time.
  22. I’m sorry that I wasted my time and others’ time on this thread.
  23. Ok, duh, well dummy me for assuming that the wording in the original post was the actual wording in the FAR clause!!!!!!!!! Here it is: “52.217-9 -- Option to Extend the Term of the Contract. As prescribed in 17.208(g), insert a clause substantially the same as the following: Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (Mar 2000) (a) The Government may extend the term of this contract by written notice to the Contractor within _____ [insert the period of time within which the Contracting Officer may exercise the option]; provided that the Government gives the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least ___ days [60 days unless a different number of days is inserted] before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension. (b) If the Government exercises this option, the extended contract shall be considered to include this option clause. (c) The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed ___________ (months)(years). (End of Clause)” The FAR isn’t ambiguous! The original post is ambiguous. The spec writer has to define the period, not just state a number of days!!! I guess that sunstrider was referring to language in a specific contract.
×
×
  • Create New...