Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

C Culham

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About C Culham

  • Rank
    Contributing Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

14,716 profile views
  1. No disagreement yet it would be my view that in the scheme of things that the rest of the reasoning applies. In other words multi-year is an issue directly related to appropriation law and as such determining what is and what is not multi-year is determined from that standpoint. By example you hold up bona fide need yet you do not hold up antideficiency as well. Not that I want to get into some discussion about antideficiency but generally speaking if there is no money in the trust fund and someone used money from it I would suspect one enters the world of antideficiency. I realize in the
  2. Further read of the Red Book got me to the point of why stop now.......of interest. And I have gone 360 and suggest that Retreads suggestion to contact DSAA is the best idea. From page 3-38 of the Vol I...short but interesting excerpt....emphasis added "A good illustration of how all of this can work is found in B-222666, Jan. 11, 1988. The Defense Security Assistance Agency (DSAA) is responsible for issuing instructions and procedures for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) transactions...." And from https://samm.dsca.mil/chapter/chapter-6#C6.T1. Again emphasis added..... C
  3. Hmmmm....The Red Book Vol I, Chapter 5, page 5-37- Excerpt with footnote...... "Any discussion of multiyear contracting must inevitably combine the bona fide needs rule with material from Chapter 6 on the Antideficiency Act and from Chapter 7 on obligations. The term “multiyear contract” has been used in a variety of situations to describe a variety of contracts touching more than one fiscal year. To prevent confusion, we think it is important to start by establishing a working definition. A multiyear contract, as we use the term in this discussion, is a contract covering the requirements
  4. No expert here but I like finding stuff that will help. @Retreadfedprobably has the best idea but I did want to provide the following. Like always a specific offered as exemplified by Don's post also depends on more specifics..... Noted FAR 17.104(a) provides an exception. As FMS funds are considered to be "nonexpiring" makes me wonder if the 5 year rule has an exception for FMS. https://www.dcma.mil/Portals/31/Documents/Policy/DCMA-MAN-2501-03.pdf Yet a read of the DFARS provides only discussion on use of options for FMS contracts making me wonder if it is the only idea availab
  5. FAR 17.103 - Multi-year contract means a contract for the purchase of supplies or services for more than 1, but not more than 5, program years. A multi-year contract may provide that performance under the contract during the second and subsequent years of the contract is contingent upon the appropriation of funds, and (if it does so provide) may provide for a cancellation payment to be made to the contractor if appropriations are not made. The key distinguishing difference between multi-year contracts and multiple year contracts is that multi-year contracts, defined in the statutes cited at 17
  6. Alright Joel I am going to leave it here as I still believe your "I doubt it" response is a continued confusion of "market price". By example I procure a cost benefit analysis at a firm fixed price competitively awarded that contains several CLINS for the effort by different expertise at an hourly rate, with variation in quantity or not. The market price by definition is the unit prices for each of the CLINS. Even if I was bold enough to seek the effort on a lump sum FFP it still is a market price. Now I have a labor hour or T&M contract with several CLINS the unit prices agai
  7. @Tzarina of Compliance I might be repeating something you are aware of yet just in case you have not I am offering as support to Don's responses. The "GAO Redbook" as it is commonly known provides great discussion about appropriation stuff and related here the Bona Fide Needs Rule. WIFCON actually has a link to the Redbook and the specifically the Bona Fide Needs Rule (see link below). Perusing might help further understanding of what Don has provided in his responses. Here is the WIFCON link.....http://www.wifcon.com/bonafidecontents.htm
  8. Joel - I think you are confusing the matter by your second noted statement. As you note the OP is already of the conclusion that the procurement entails procuring labor hours or persons and as FAR Part 2 definition of Commercial Item provides a labor hour rate can be commercial item market price. FAR Part 2 excerpt of commercial item definition means "means current prices that are established in the course of ordinary trade between buyers and sellers free to bargain and that can be substantiated through competition or from sources independent of the offerors." So one could call u
  9. While the Beginners Forum Neil has raised a very good point especially when the program states "without this kind of interaction and direction.". Noting this takes the OP down a rabbit hole of much more thought than just commercial item. But, as to commercial item even though a personal service contract does not mean it cannot be a commercial item contract as well as I see no exclusion in FAR Part 12 or 37 nor the definition of Commercial Item at FAR Part 2 that states a service that is defined as personal in nature by the FAR can not be a commercial item procurement. Finding indi
  10. Never saw this answered this away so adding for clarification. The FSS contractor must price using the labor rates in their contract. Hours if not dictated by the RFQ are up to the contractor in preparing their "price". A contractor may offer a discount however. Here are a couple of clause that you will usually find in your GSA FSS contract - 552.238-81 PRICE REDUCTIONS (MAY 2019) (ALTERNATE I - APR 2014) and I-FSS-600 CONTRACT PRICE LISTS (OCT 2020). Might be worthwhile to read all the terms and conditions of your GSA FSS contract for further clarifying information.
  11. This away just to add to Retread's post. They synopsize the proposed modification as taking the route of a modification to the existing contract following the FAR rules on synopsizing a sole source. After wading through the process and if the conclusion to still do a sole source the contract will be modified as intended to add the additional scope. it meets CICA by following the synopsis/sole source process. Not sure this exactly on point just found it quickly...... https://www.gao.gov/products/b-414260
  12. Generally speaking. State agency with state rules on their solicitation (RFQ) processes. My experience is dig into what the state agency rules might say on the matter of responsiveness to you. In the end it may be exactly as ji implies, they are dealing with all the questions fairly. Or even better yet maybe a telephone call to the responsible state individual to see if they would answer the question - "Why are you not answering my questions?"
  13. PS - Exactly what USDA-FS did with regard to IBPA's. Did not change the whole of the AGAR but did get approval for the specific IBPA vehicle. Maybe @FrankJon takes a small bite of the apple for the specific need as an innovative idea to help prove that a wholesale change be implemented in the DFARS that takes the limitation to the commercial item threshold of $7.5 million when the need is determined to be a commercial item.
  14. Just an example. At the US Forest Service they had a vehicle, an EERA (Emergency Equipment Rental Agreement) that was challenged as it did not fit FAR principles nor its use allowed for competition. Simply write a EERA with contractor then use them on an incident when you pleased. The Forest Service then studied and through the GAO decisions posted the with links in this thread came up with an Incident Blanket Purchase Agreement (IBPA). They solicit annually the establishment of IBPA's then established hundreds of IBPA's and then use an allocation system called VIPR to award calls agains
  • Create New...