Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Thanks Vern for your insight,not so much confused, I abide by the regs and I also could not find anything to the contrary regarding fee on educational institutions. I will check with my customer who is an agency I cannot discuss. Having some experience with them I believe that fee is allowable under this circumstanec. I really appreciate the quick repsonses I received from all members. Thanks ED
  2. I do however want to state that I am a Gov't Prime with a CPAF contract seking to retain U 0f A as a sub..I will be contacting the contracting officer tomorrow. I looked at FAR and DFAR as well as A-21 and struck out. Thanks again, ED
  3. Seeking to subcontract with Uiniv of Arizona, they submitted a CPAF proposal for R&D effort we were requesting. I had thought that since they are a "non profit" organization they weren't able to bid fee?? Researching the FAR they refer to OMB -21 which discusses what costs are allowable however no where is fee discussed. AS i cannot find any direct proscription against fee for educational institutions, I assume they are entitled to it. Would appreciate someone with experience in contracting with Universites, educate me. Thank you in advance . ED
  4. Vern: This was imposed by my customer, on my contract; however; if you look at the clause it states it can be used on a cost type contract as a "guide". I am of the opinion that it should not and have contacted the KO to so state. Thanks for your opinion anyway. ED
  5. Please remember this is a cost contract and as such title vests with the Gov't when payment is received or when material is released to the floor for performance of the contract. I recognize F.O.B states title passes on acceptance by Gov't at destination. That is the problem I see here; title has already passed. We do not have 52.246-16 in the contract; I believe this pertains to FFP only. Appreciate your comments Thanks ED
  6. It is my underdstanding that the Gov't is generally self insured; we have a CPIF contract that has called out FAR 52.247-34 F.O.B. Destination; as you are well aware the clause contains language that stipulates the contactor bears the risk of loss until delivered to consignee's dock. Title to this property is already vested in the Gov't prior to shipment and as such is Gov't Property. Being Gov't property 52.245-1 states that the contractor is not responsible for loss or damage unless such loss/damage was caused by contractor's wilfull misconduct. This would seemingly contridict the loss risk associated with F.O.B destination. Looking for any insight that you may have regarding this issue. Ed
  • Create New...