ji20874

Members
  • Content count

    1,171
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ji20874

  • Rank
    Platinum Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Vermont

Recent Profile Visitors

17,459 profile views
  1. It is okay to have a FFP contract with very specific labor requirements -- for example, a FFP contract for guard services might require one guard at each post for X hours per day, and the agency might rigorously count hours. To your case: What changed? The labor market? Or your company's labor force? Did you make a mistake in your offer? It sounds like the Government requirement has not changed. Maybe (weak, but maybe) you might find something to help in FAR 17.202( c ).
  2. A contractor can receive a contract even if it is not registered for the appropriate NAICS code in SAM.
  3. The answer is going to depend on your own agency regulations and culture. For example: option exercises. I have been in an agency where the contracting officer signing the exercise had to have a warrant level appropriate for the potential value of the entire contract, and I am in an agency now where the contracting officer only needs a warrant level appropriate for the option being exercised.
  4. That's true, but here the contractor's position is stronger if the modification is unilateral and weaker if it is bilateral.
  5. Was the modification done unilaterally or bilaterally? If unilaterally, with what authority? If unilaterally, the contractor might be entitled to consideration (an increase in the contract price?) if the contractor asks for it. Or, a unilateral modification without consideration might be null and void. If bilaterally, well, the contractor may have already given away its rights, and may have to eat the costs of compliance with the new contract term.
  6. Ain't that the truth! It happens all too often, by otherwise reasonable people. We need to read and interpret the FAR in a reasonable manner, in a manner that makes sense, and so forth. Common sense, please...
  7. The contract specialist role can be contracted out. If if your client doesn't want to ask reasonable questions now, you might recommend that they include their assumptions in the proposal they submit.
  8. I haven't.
  9. There was a war going on. People were being killed. All of the revolutionaries were criminals in the eyes of the law. Hurrah for Colonel Ross! What about satisfying the customer? FAR 1.102( d ): "In exercising initiative, Government members of the Acquisition Team may assume if a specific strategy, practice, policy, or procedure is in the best interests of the Government, and is not addressed in the FAR nor prohibited by law (statute or case law), Executive order or other regulation, that the strategy, practice, policy, or procedure is a permissible exercise of authority." What about taking prudent risks? FAR 1.102-2( c )( 2 ): "The Executive Branch will accept and manage the risk associated with empowering local procurement officials to take independent action based on their professional judgment." If the revolutionaries had lost the war, then the contract would not have been enforceable in the King's courts. But "Ol' George Washington whooped that king, and the eagle squalled, 'Let Freedom Ring!'" One of the first acts of the new Government was to honor the commitments, promises, and contracts made during the revolution. Ratification -- how about that!
  10. Valid contract? No, it was treason against His Majesty! Aiding and abetting sedition and insurrection. :-) The secret committee did what was necessary and what it was authorized to do -- that's valid in my eyes.
  11. guy, You tried to do a FAR Subpart 8.4 buy as a set-aside but you received no quotes. My post above was thinking that you now still want to procure under FAR Subpart 8.4 but open to large and small schedule contractors? Is that right? If so, I hope my answer above is helpful. However, if you now want to go open market, then my answer above cannot help you. If so, you are now under FAR Part 19 for the first time.
  12. If this acquisition was controlld by FAR Part 19, then the set-aside was withdrawn automatically dissolved under FAR 19.507 -- the small business specialist is irrelevant and his or her coordination is not required. You might be thinking that FAR 19.506 applies. Read both of them and decide for yourself. However, FAR Part 19 does not apply to a FAR Subpart 8.4 acquisition, right? But surely this principle applies?
  13. LucyQ, Your company would have been far better served by asking the question about financing before the contract between your company and the prime contractor Government was finalized. But even now, retreadfed gives good advice -- regardless of what or when the contracting officer pays the prime contractor, your company and the prime contractor can work out almost whatever arrangement you want to.
  14. If the purpose of the contract is to produce cigarettes rolled with hundred-dollar bills, and the Government is going to provide a supply of C-notes for the contractor to use in producing the cigarettes, then YES, the hundred-dollar bills will be material as defined in the clause at FAR 52.245-1, Government Property.
  15. At first, anything requiring chief of the contracting office (COCO) approval had to go forward to the agency's HCA in D.C. After a while, the HCA delegated COCO authority to the deputy chief of the office. Maybe something like when Darlene Druyun stripped the SMC commander of his acquisition authority in the C-17 saga? The three-star commander was still the center commander, but his acquisition work (the biggest part of his job?) was done by the one-star deputy center commander. The story I described happened back in 2011 or thereabouts -- I don't recall exactly. I was in another region and saw it all happen. I left the agency soon afterwards and I cannot report on how effective the new regional Acquisition Management Director was in delivering flexibility and responsiveness. The regional Acquisition Management Director position was owned by the regional [manager], who did not have to get the concurrence of the agency's Acquisition Management Director in this matter.