Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ji20874

  1. If the agency really wants contractor performance on an IDIQ basis anywhere in the US for work that is subject to the formerly-styled Service Contract Act, the contracting officer should apply for a nationwide wage determination. The procedures for this are at https://www.dol.gov/whd/govcontracts/sca/sf98/instructions.htm. Then, the solicitation will have only one wage determination. Here's an example of a nationwide wage determination, dated 9/05/2017: https://www.wdol.gov/wdol/scafiles/non-std/99-0316.sca. Here's another one, dated 12/30/2016: https://gacc.nifc.gov/nrcc/dispatch/equipment_supplies/agree-contract/WageDetermination.pdf. The clause at FAR 52.222-49 is for use when the Government does not specify the place of performance, but this matter is left up to the offerors. The clause allows offerors to request wage determinations for their specific locations before offers are submitted -- but if an offeror does not do this, too bad, then the wage determination for the appropriate locality will be added after award with no adjustment in contract price. That's fair. But this clause (FAR 52.222-49) is not appropriate in the original poster's circumstance, as I understand it; rather, the contracting officer needs to request a nationwide wage determination. A nationwide wage determination is appropriate when a contractor will be dispatching people to any location in the country -- I am supposing this is the case for the original posting. However, if the agency really requires permanent placement of employees at several locations in the country, then a wage determination for each locality is appropriate -- and it is the contracting officer's job to make this happen before solicitation release.
  2. Basic Question

    Maybe FAR 51.102(c)(5) will be helpful? It doesn't appear to have any limitations. Practically, though, I have only ever heard of this process being used to allow contractor ordering from schedules and government stock.
  3. Basic Question

    Jon, What is your citation for "government source of supply"?
  4. Vets 4212 reporting question

    Doesn't a contractor file one 4212 report for the whole company? Not one per contract, or one per order?
  5. The Forest Service never contracts for a contractor to put out a fire. The Government retains complete control, and hires contractors almost as employees to work under Government direction. I think so many people have done things wrong for so long that it is hard to have a correct understanding. In my contracting officer practice, I can easily see a requirement for a warm body to do assigned tasks for 1,880 hours over the course of a year as a firm-fixed-price requirement. The requirement is 1,880 hours and that can be FFP on either a lump sum or per hour basis. CLIN: 001 Supplies/Services: Secretary IAW SOW Qty: 1,880 Unit: HR (hour) Unit Price: $50.00 Amount: $94,000 Period of Performance: one year, maximum 8 hours per Government work day Contract Type: FFP The above is a FFP arrangement, not a T&M/LH arrangement. The contractor is obligated to deliver 1,880 hours over the course of the year, and is in default if it only delivers 1,779. If you want to buy hours, you can buy them FFP -- whether for a fixed quantity or an estimated quantity. For T&M/LH, we are not buying hours -- we are buying accomplishment of something where we are uncertain as to the actual number of hours that might be needed. If I need my cuckoo clock repaired, and the clockmaker and I estimate about 10 hours of work and $100 in parts in a T&M/LH contract, I don't buy 10 hours -- I buy one repair job, as follows: CLIN: 002 Supplies/Services: Clock Repair IAW SOW Qty: 1 Unit: JB (job) Unit Price: $600 Amount: $600 Ceiling Price: $600 Labor Category: Clockmaker III Fixed Hourly Rate: $50 Contract Type: T&M
  6. Progress Payments by CLIN

    ConMan411, Good luck! However, as I said in my first comment, sometimes it seems that DFAS cares nothing about the text of the contract or a contract's clauses, and does wherever it wants when paying invoices -- so while this text might be helpful in memorializing the intent of the parties, it might not solve the DFAS problem. By the way, I think you could adopt this approach without the clarifying text -- but I suggested the text since there is not a meeting of the minds.
  7. Progress Payments by CLIN

    Pepe, No, it is not a deviation. We do it all the time. For example, if a contract contains both fixed-price and cost-reimbursement CLINs, we commonly say that FAR 52.246-2 applies only to the fixed-price CLINs and FAR 52.246-3 applies only to the cost-reimbursement CLINs -- in doing so, we apply the clauses at the CLIN level instead of at the contract level -- but the text of those clauses speaks of "contract", not "CLIN". Is that a deviation? No, it is common practice and good sense. As Vern once taught us, a CLIN is a contract within a contract. See http://www.wifcon.com/discussion/index.php?/topic/2722-contract-v-clin-semantics/. Do you have anything to add that will be helpful to the original poster?
  8. Progress Payments by CLIN

    ConMan411, One of the problems with the FAR is that it is written with the general assumption that every contract will include only one contract type. When a contract contains two or more contract types, as yours does, it often makes sense to apply FAR stipulations driven by contract type at the CLIN level, rather than at the contract level. Would that make sense for you? If so, maybe something as simple as the following might suffice: SECTION G - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION/PAYMENT DATA Agreement of the Parties Regarding Progress Payments. The parties agree that progress payments under the clause at FAR 52.232-16, Progress Payments, will be administered at the CLIN level. Accordingly, the word "contract" in that clause is understood to mean "contract line item (CLIN)." Accordingly, computation of amounts, liquidation, and so forth will occur at the CLIN level rather than at the contract level.
  9. napolik, I have done it by including a statement in the award document that I sign. For example, an awarded contract might contain (a) the acceptance -- a few pages with the contracting officer's signature on the contract SF-1447; and (b) the offer -- the underlying solicitation A-J with the offeror's signature on the solicitation SF-1447 and fill-ins in Sec. B. The acceptance (a) and the offer (b) combine to form the contract. The incorporation statement goes in (a).
  10. Bilateral: by including the new text in Section H proper. Unilateral: by including the new text in the award document.
  11. The Section L blurb is already in the solicitation, saying that any aspect or feature of the proposal may be incorporated into the resulting contract: L-6. Incorporation into Contract The Government may incorporate any aspect or feature of the offeror's proposal into the resulting contract. Then, in the awarded contract, you include text such as in Section H (Special Contract Requirements): H-19. Incorporation into Contract The automobile provided by the contractor shall be a Mercedes Model Z. This requirement does not waive, relax, or alter any other requirement of this contract. or H-19. Incorporation into Contract The Contractor shall use the approach to nickel-cadmium plating with Acme Platers described on pages 14-16 of the offeror's proposal. This requirement does not waive, relax, or alter any other requirement of this contract. These are simplified examples. In real life, there would be a few more words.
  12. I usually include text in my solicitation Section L that any aspect or feature of the offeror's proposal may be incorporated into any resulting contract. You write contract text saying that the particular aspect or feature is incorporated into the contract. Using your example, where the requirement was for an automobile that goes at least 65mph and has trunk capacity of at least 1 cubic yard and seats five comfortably and so forth, and the best value offer was a Mercedes Model Z, you include text that the contractor will provide a Mercedes Model Z. If the reason for the selection was an offeror's superior approach to nickel-cadmium plating using a specific subcontractor, you include text that the contractor's approach to nickel-cadmium plating using that named subcontractor, as described in pages 14-16 of its technical proposal, is incorporated into the contract. NOTE: This is not incorporating the entirety of the offeror's technical proposal into the contract -- generally, I do not like doing that -- and this is not incorporating pages 14-16, either. Anyway, I might also include a statement that this incorporation of the feature or aspect of the proposal into the contract does not waive, relax, or alter any other requirement of the contract -- the Mercedes Model Z still has to meet all of the performance requirements and/or design criteria in the statement of work (the contractor offered the Model Z to meet exactly those requirements). Normally, I would call this contract text a clause -- but there is some sensitivity in this forum about contracting officers and home-made clauses, so I haven't used the term. But I am all in favor of home-made clauses when appropriate -- I think drafting clauses for use in contracts is a crucial skill for contracting officers to have -- a contracting officer who cannot do it is to worth his or her pay. Agency and local rules that prohibit contracting officers from writing home-made clauses are stupid rules. NOTE: I am talking about clauses drafted by the contracting officer that are not deviations -- also I am not talking about clauses promulgated by the agency head.
  13. Progress Payments by CLIN

    When I was a DoD contracting officer many years ago, I was aware that DFAS cares nothing about the text of the contract or the contract's FAR clauses, and does wherever it wants when paying invoices -- this leaves PCOs and ACOs to find workarounds to try to respect the contract's text. It seems that hasn't changed.
  14. napolik, My practice: Whenever I conduct a trade-off, and the winner is selected because of some feature or aspect of its offer or proposal (yes, these are different), I want to incorporate that feature or aspect into the resulting contract. Vern, i hope your efforts here will result in a contracting officer somewhere shifting more towards evaluating offers (promises) and less on evaluating proposals. This means our solicitations should ask more for offers (promises) and less for proposals.
  15. el conejo, You don't need a citation. The protester didn't give you a citation. There is no basis for the protester's argument, so the protest can be denied because the protester failed to establish the basis of the protest.
  16. Dear Sir (or Ma'am), i am in receipt of your protest to the agency of our award of a task (or delivery) order to _____ for __________. The basis for your protest is that we relied on your quotation of 8/18/2017 in evaluation and award process, rather than your quotation of 6/29/2017. Your quotation of 6/29/2017 was sought for market research purposes, and was used for market research purposes. Your quotation of 8/18/2017 was sought for a purchase, and was used for that purpose. Your later quotation (of 8/18/2017) was materially different from your earlier quotation (of 6/29/2017). One supposes you could have extended your earlier quotation if you wanted us to use it for our purchase, but you did not. Instead, you provided a new quotation. We reasonably used your new quotation for our evaluation and award process. There is no basis for your argument that we should have used your earlier quotation instead of your later quotation for our evaluation and award process. Your protest is denied. i appreciate your interest in Government procurement. /s/ Contracting Officer
  17. When the question is the authority that someone relied on for a specific action taken by that person, the very best answer is to ask that person. Asking the contracting officer directly is very good advice -- sometimes it's the best advice.
  18. Please ask the person who sent the e-mail.
  19. No. That is not a partial set-aside. Rather, that is reserving some awards for small businesses. See FAR 19.502-4, where reserves are covered by para. (a) and set-asides are covered by para. (b). I am supposing that Alliant WAS NOT a partial set--aside.
  20. J&A Requirement

    FAR 6.302-1(c) refers only to products, not services. The original poster seems to be talking about services. Therefore, I don't think FAR 6.302-1 applies in this scenario where a small percentage of the contract is for work on items which must be performed by the item OEMs. The solution may be as simple as a statement of work blurb saying that the needed services must be performed by the OEM or one of its licensees or dealers. This may be true because of product warranty or similar considerations. I'm thinking that a J&A is not needed.
  21. napolik, Maybe the Alliant contracting officer didn't have a reasonable expectation that small businesses could fulfill the entire requirement. I'm supposing, but that would be a valid reason.
  22. page limitations on proposals

    As long as the Government is expected to read and understand every word in a technical proposal, and unsuccessful offerors will try to re-do the technical evaluation in a protest, then page limits make sense.
  23. page limitations on proposals

    I think there is some merit to 1, 3, and 5. And in the current environment, tight page limits generally make sense.