DCGOVLAW

Agreed they are required to recertify within 30 days. Including unless the CO asks part in my sentence was in error. Meant to say even if the CO asks. But, reading Analytic Strategies in conjunction with conservative reading of Enhanced Vision Sys., even if the recertify, they can still use the existing MAC status to bid the TOs but the agency can't count award against their SB goals.

Yes, 2016 version does not have the words "to this Paragraph (g)". The July 2013 52.219-28. It is a 10 year contract (base plus options) so it is long-term. I am aware that the proposed rule from Nov. 2019 will eliminate this issue and require SBs to recertify on each new TO. SBA 2018-0006 "SBA, believes, however, that there is a legitimate concern where a concern self-certifies as small for an unrestricted MAC and at some point later in time when the concern no longer qualifies as small the contracting officer seeks to award an order as a small business set-aside and the firm uses its self-certification as a small business for the underlying unrestricted MAC. … To allow a firm's self-certification for the underlying MAC to control whether a firm is small at the time of an order years after the MAC was awarded does not make sense to SBA." Our research indicates that for now Company A can still rely on their SB status at time of submission of the offer for the underlying MAC in 2016 unless the CO asks for a re-cert. But when SBA 2018-0006 goes final that will no longer be the case. Full section of new 121.404(a)(i)(A) posted below if you are interested. (A) Unrestricted Multiple Award Contracts. For an unrestricted Multiple Award Contract, if a business concern is small at the time of offer and contract-level recertification for the Multiple Award Contract, it is small for goaling purposes for each order issued against the contract, unless a contracting officer requests a size recertification for a specific order or Blanket Purchase Agreement. However, except for orders and Blanket Purchase Agreements issued under any Federal Supply Schedule contract, if an order or a Blanket Purchase Agreement under an unrestricted Multiple Award Contract is set-aside exclusively for small business (i.e., small business set-aside, 8(a) small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, or women-owned small business), a concern must recertify its size status and qualify as a small business at the time it submits its initial offer, which includes price, for the particular order or Blanket Purchase Agreement.

Company A is small business who submitted proposal for IDIQ in late 2016 and was awarded contract on SB track in October 2018. RFI issued for $100m task order in Sept. 2019 and company A certified as small in response so procurement set aside as there were 2 SBs. Company A acquired by large business in December 2019. Quick question - is the May 2018 technical amendment to 121.404(g) that added the language "However, the following exceptions apply to this Paragraph (g):" applicable here? In other words, is it applicable retroactively to an IDIQ proposal certifying Company A as small in 2016 such that they were required to recertify upon acquisition? There is nothing in the final rule at 83 FR 12849 that says it cannot be applied to certs made prior to May 2018. If it is applicable, we don't have 2 SBs for this task order to be a set-aside as Company A would have to recertify as large. Thanks in advance.

It is my understanding that the yearly pricing is higher than the WD rates but lower than the CBA rates. So the contractor will recover the loss (i.e., make enough profit on the out years to cover the losses from the first 2 plus some gravy) when the wage rates are lowered to match the WDR. (I know people say this all the time, but I am actually asking the question for another. I have no personal involvement in the contract or the negotiation)

Facts: 5 year option contract to provide janitorial services; years one and two wages are under a CBA; CBA expires during performance and contract states that the prevailing wage determination will apply to remaining option years upon expiration of the CBA; CBA wages are higher than incorporated wage determination rates; contractor operated at a loss at the CBA rates; the agency knew the wage rates were lower under the WDR than under the CBA when they executed this FFP contract. Situation: CO seeks a reduction in the firm fixed price contract price to capture the difference between the CBA rates and the wage determination rates. Question: Does the expiration of the CBA and reversion to the WDR constitute "a decreased wage determination applied to this contract by operation of law" even though the WDR was incorporated into the contract at the time of execution? Certainly there is an equitable argument here somewhere???

I am looking at a small business set aside for supplies that has been assigned a NAICS code with a 1,000 employee size standard. There is a class waiver for this NAICS code and the supplies required by the RFP. I have been unsuccessfully searching for guidance, i.e., a reg or anything, concerning the applicability of waivers and the proper size. That is, if there is a class waiver, is the proper size still 500 under the NMR or is it 1,000 as listed on the SF1449? I read the waiver of the NMR only to apply to the requirement that the small business must provide the supplies of another small business (notwithstanding my note below). Others here read the waiver of the 500 employee standard of the NMR. Any assistance is greatly appreciated. Importantly, the regulation as currently included in the 2013 version of the CFR is incorrect. The old version of 13 CFR 121.406( (1)(iii) stated "Will supply the end item of a small business manufacturer or processor made in the United States, or obtains a waiver of such requirement pursuant to paragraph ( (3) of this section." This section was amended in 2012 to state "Takes ownership or possession of the item(s) with its personnel, equipment or facilities in a manner consistent with industry practice". The old section (iii) was moved to subpart (iv). However, the current reference in the waiver section still refers back to ( (1)(iii). So as the regulation currently reads the agency is waiving the requirement for ownership and possession NOT the requirement for supplying the end of item another small business. Thanks again!! edited to add that when I post it changes my b to a smiley face. I don't know how to make that not happen. So wherever there is a face it is really a b. I do not have a smiley face after wading through all this NMR junk.

Off to a good start! FYI - SAM appears to be completely down and has been since yesterday morning. And you can no longer access ccr.gov or any of the links through bpn.gov including ccr, orca. fsd.gov reports - "The System for Award Management (SAM) is experiencing performance issues that are in the process of being addressed. Due to the SAM issues, the Federal Service Desk (FSD) is experiencing higher than normal call volumes. If you experience issues with search feature in SAM for Exclusions, please use the following website to conduct these searches: EPLS.gov."