Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Desparado

Members
  • Content count

    308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Desparado

  1. Desparado

    GSA Application Services

    I checked some of the recent awards for one of the schedules I oversee, and this company did represent the contractor for one that was awarded recently, so I would have to say they are "legit". This statement does not endorse the aforementioned company.
  2. Desparado

    GSA Application Services

    I don't know about that particular company, but we receive many requests from companies represented by "agents" or "consultants".
  3. Desparado

    GSA FSS SOS

    For more information about ordering from a Schedule contract for a timeframe beyond the expiration date, I have pasted the below from the site http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/101193: Options may be included on orders placed against GSA Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) contracts, provided that the options are clearly stated in the requirement and are evaluated as part of the ordering activity's best value determination. Such options may be exercised on GSA Schedule contract orders, provided that: Funds are available; The requirement covered by the option fulfills an existing government need; Prior to exercising an option, the ordering activity ensures that it is still in the government's best interest; i.e., that the option is the most advantageous method of fulfilling the government's need, price and other factors considered; and The options do not extend beyond the period of the Schedule contract, including option year periods. Under the preceding conditions, Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) under Schedule contracts may be established with options that extend beyond the end of the basic Schedule contract period. The length of the order and the risk to the ordering activity could be considered as part of the overall evaluation of best value.
  4. Desparado

    GSA FSS SOS

    A couple of points on this topic. Please remember that a GSA Schedules Contract is a 5yr contract with 3-5yr option periods, so it is highly likely that the contract you reference will have its option exercised and will run beyond 2013. This should eliminate the "open market" scenario. If the option is not exercised, then no further task orders could be executed or task-order-options exercised under the contract. A GSA Contractor can not charge a price as part of a Delivery/Task Order that is higher than their negotiated price on their schedule contract. To do so would be in violation of their contract and if caught they would have to refund the government, with interest. If they quote prices for 2013/2014 and those prices end up being higher than what is on their schedule contract, they are required to reduce the amounts to be no more than what is in their schedule contract. If you have any concerns with the GSA Schedule Contract, I would recommend contacting the contracting officer who administers the contract. They should be able to help you.
  5. Govt - There is a difference between a Schedule and a Schedule Contract. Our schedules (yes, I'm with GSA) run continuous without an end date. The contracts awarded under the schedules program however, are a different story. They are awarded as a 5yr contract with 3-5yr option periods, so they could last up to 20 years. To address the original question, the link provided previously is correct, you can award a BPA under a schedule contract past the current expiration date if there are additional options available for that contract. If you have a question concerning the availability of additional options, you should contact the Contracting Officer that administers that contract. They could easily get that information for you. Hope this helps.
  6. I would base your discount off of your Commercial Price List and not your GSA rate. GSA will always go after the Most Favored Customer rate, and thus creates a vicious cycle. Why would you want a reseller's price to be lower than your's anyway, just out of curiosity...
  7. Desparado

    The Occasion of Multiple SINs

    That's just it, the PGI should go by what the DFARS states when it says, "As many schedule contractors as practicable". It should be consistent... and not try to put in additional requirements.
  8. Desparado

    The Occasion of Multiple SINs

    @napolik I note that in DFARS (used to work for the Army) it states "As many schedule contractors as practicable, consistent with market research appropriate to the circumstances, to reasonably ensure that offers will be received from at least three contractors that can fulfill the requirements, and the contracting officer...". I do not see that as mandating eBuy. As far as the PGI goes, it states that eBuy, "is one medium for providing fair notice to all contractors as required by DFARS 208.405-70?(2)". Again, I do not see that as a mandate. When I worked for the Army, I disliked using eBuy because in many cases I wanted to streamline the process as much as possible. Using eBuy for some item/services creates numerous "No Quotes", or so many responses that my estimated timeline for evaluation gets tripled. One of the advantages of GSA Schedules is supposed to be the ability to get things done quicker. For non-DoD agencies, they merely have to survey at least three schedule contractors (for items not requiring a SOW), or solicit quotes from at least three sources (if there is a SOW). FAR 8.4 does state that if it is a large procurement that you have to expand your search "to additional schedule contractors that offer services that will meet the needs of the ordering activity". DoD has taken what is supposed to an easy process and complicated it. @Woops85 I just wish GSA would organize their AAs, PINs, PIBs, and all their other "guidance" into a more inclusive site. eCats is getting there, but is far short.
  9. Desparado

    The Occasion of Multiple SINs

    Do you have a reference for that requirement? I currently work for GSA and that information would be helpful. Thanks.
  10. Desparado

    Insourcing

    I've heard that the President is wanting insourcing to be done, but haven't seen a "directive" on it. Do you have a link?
  11. Is the 8(m) progam authorizing WOSB Set-Asides in effect? I've heard conflicting information on this and haven't seen anything through official channels (but it always takes forever for info to flow down). I am curious, if it is in effect, has anyone out there starting receiving implementation instructions? Thank you
  12. Desparado

    The 8(m) Program

    Yes, thank you. It appears, per the article, that there is a "proposed rule" that may go into effect prior to the end of the year. Time will tell if it will actually happens. Thanks again.
  13. Common sense aside, is there anything in writing that states that a Contractor providing "Acquisition Support" (1102 type work, other than signing the documents) has to have the same basic education requirements as the 1102s that would be doing the same work in the same office?
  14. I apologize for not being more detailed. The types of duties I am referring to is basically everything a Contract Specialist without a warrant would do. Prepare all pre-award documents (to include the Pre-negotiation Memorandum, Responsibility Determination, Determination of Price Reasonableness, Price Negotiation Memorandum, etc...) for the CO's signature. The contractors also perform post-award functions to include everything except the actual signing of the document(s). To me, the level of knowledge required to prepare this documentation is at least that of the education/training that 1102s are required to possess.
  15. To me, it would make sense for it to be the same. It's doing the same work, so why shouldn't the qualification to do that work be the same? I can think of reasons you'd need 1102 work to be done and not hire Civil Service (temporary increase in workload being the first one I think of).
  16. Our solicitation has a NAICS code associated with each SIN that is listed on the schedule. If an offeror puts in for more than one SIN, we would pick the NAICS code for the SIN where a majority of the offeror's sales would be forecasted. That selection would affect the need for a Sub-K plan, the listing in eLibrary, and the entry into fpds-ng. There is no set-aside on the schedule that I work on, so I do not know it would apply to that. Our contracting system (FSS Online) does not permit a different determination for each SIN. The determination is made at the Contract level. If a company were to have more than one contract, conceivably it could be Small for one contract and Large for another based upon the NAICS codes. I hope this helps.
  17. Looks like you are dealing with a MOBIS contract, and their rules may be different. The GSA schedule I work with has multiple NAICS codes on it, depending on the SIN(s) applied for, so the statement that, "GSA has decided that all schedules have to have only one NAIC" is not entirely accurate, but may be for the MOBIS schedule (I am not familiar with that schedule). Our schedule utilizes the 121.407 rule that you cited to determine which NAICS code will apply in business size determination. I still do not understand if the GSA CO would or would not permit you to request to change the size determination via modification (admin or otherwise). I know that on my schedule we have done that on a few occassions.
  18. When you exercised your option, how was your ORCA completed? Usually, when we (I am currently at GSA) come up to exercise a 5-year option, we pull the most current ORCA certification and use that as the primary basis for size determination. I believe Don is correct in that your first step should be to notify your GSA Contracting Officer with the details of the error. If it was truly an administrative error, the contracting officer should be able to change the size determination via modification.
  19. Desparado

    Clauses

    I used PD2 when I worked for DoD, and it's clause chooser STUNK!! I ended up having to delete everything it put in and do it the old fashioned way, and now I'm glad that I did... It helped me to learn about the different provisions/clauses and their applicability. The matrix in 52.3 is a decent starting point. However, nothing replacing the research that is necessary for each Part and their provisions/clauses. It is a shame, that as an Intern, you haven't been introduced enough to the FAR to know how to determine which clauses are required. That is not a remark about you, but about the sad shape of our intern programs. I would recommend taking the initiative and bug your trainer/coach to provide you with some instruction.
  20. I would recommend reviewing FAR 15.306. It appears that the communications you have had with these offerors goes beyond the definition of "clarifications" and would enter the "discussions" arena, which should only occur after the establishment of the competitive range (if one is established). The only reference I see for reviewing offers prior to the closing date is in 15.207( c ) and that only deals with unreadable documents. You also mention that these are things that you discovered prior to the closing time. Do you give the same review to someone who walks in with 30-seconds left and submits their offer? It sounds like the playing field may not have been level. I would recommend (in the future) not doing any "reviews" of offers other than to ensure they are readable. Otherwise, you open yourself up to the issue you currently have. As a KO, I would not want to establish a competitive range under the circumstances you describe other than to include everyone in it (again, to attempt to have a level playing field). Since the discussions are tailored toward each offer, the ones that are technically unacceptable probably won't get any better and will be removed at a later point.
  21. Desparado

    Ethical Rule-Breaking?

    While working for DoD, I ran across this several times while processing ratifications. Nothing ever happened to the offender and in many cases, that person was congratulated for "getting the mission accomplished". Most requiring activities have the opinion of, "Here's what I want, here's my money, make it happen". They don't care about the rules and see the FAR as a hinderance to mission accomplishment. The sad part is if they had come to us prior to breaking the rules, we could have gotten their precious mission accomplished legally.
  22. Desparado

    What is your favorite FAR Part?

    For me, it's Part 15. All of the FAR is applicable, of course, but Part 15 is the one that is utilized the most (in my humble opinion).
  23. Desparado

    GSA SCHEDULES

    Vern - It will be nice when a re-write comes out. Since the current version specifically states, "... listed below in descending order of priority" many people interpret that as written... Even with the recent GAO decisions, my old boss interpreted it to be "Yes, you don't HAVE to buy from a non-mandatory source", but you have to consider it before you can go open market and justify why you're not using it." so the re-write needs to be done.
  24. Desparado

    GSA SCHEDULES

    When I worked for the VA, they took 8.002 very seriously. I had to document in my Market Research memorandum what FSS research I did before I could purchase Open Market. It didn't have to be verbose, but it did have to detail what schedules I reviewed and then I had to make a "determination" that no FSS schedules applied before I could initiate an Open Market purchase. To directly answer your question. If your agency views 8.002 as a literal policy, you probably just need to document your market research and then drive on.
  25. Desparado

    Reverse Auctioning

    Ft. Monmouth used to do some reverse auctioning, but then the Army fell in love with FedBid and I haven't heard much from Monmouth since. I wish the government had a government-owned/operated reverse auctioning site instead of using FedBid. The surcharge that FedBid charges to the Contractor (who of course passes it on to the Government) raises the costs the taxpayer pays. Now FedBid will argue that the reverse-auctioning process will save more than the surcharge charges, but my experience with reverse-auctioning does not bear that out. In fact, most times Contractors will bid only once (the same amount minus the surcharge that they would have sent in response to a normal RFQ). To be applicable for services, the services would have to be well defined with no room for negotiation. Reverse-auctioning is only good for a pseudo IFB, because it is based on price only. There used to be a long discussion thread on FedBid (where FedBid themselves participated in the discussion). I wasn't able to find it however.
×