RedHorse74

Thanks for the reply, Mr. Edwards. The contract in question has a database of information on government equipment. We have no qualms providing the database info, the software licenses, etc. to the government - they clearly paid for it and I think the DFARS make that clear. My question was regarding the internal procedures (not kept in the database) for things like "responding to customer phone calls", "troubleshooting the X model of equipment", etc. learned during the duration of the program. Its how we operate the program, but really isn't government data as far as I can tell. Sorry I wasn't more clear before.

After reviewing the definition for technical data in FAR Section 2 and DFARS 252.227-7013 (which is in our contract), I am still trying to determine if internal program procedures developed for a specific program and kept on a shared company server (in MS Word) for internal use constitute "recorded information" or not? My customer wants the information for recompete purposes and I don't really want to provide it. Sorry for the newbie question. Thanks!

Thanks for the comments. I wondered about the clause version so that confirms my suspicions. I agree with you about the comment on FFP. I currently have several ID/IQs which are "FFP contracts" where the only thing FFP appears to be the fixed labor rate. The KOs use this to justify the FFP designation while we work on a T&M basis.

On a similar topic, I thought it was a tried and true principal in FAR 52.232-7 that you could charge the labor rate in the prime contract for the services of your subcontractor provided they met the labor descriptions (strict interpretation) of the prime contract. I recently came across the Serco v. PBGC descision (CBCA 1695) and was trying to determine if it changes that rule? Was there something I missed in that decision like that contract had labor rates for both prime and sub and they used the wrong ones or something?

I wish our CSP was that detailed. Our class of customer is simply "all commercial customers". Our division really doesn't have commercial products or services, so all of our business is either with the Fed Govt or federal systems integrators. The systems integrators are our "commercial customers' as I read it. I feel like there is a gray area regarding selling services to another division in our company which is reselling them to either a federal govt customer or a commercial company. I am trying to determine if that is a commercial sale and I am coming-up empty on GSA publications. Appreciate any pointers you might have.

Folks: I am attempting to find out if GSA considers an intra-company work transfer (selling services to another business unit of the same company at transfer pricing) a commercial sale for the purposes of the most favored customer and price reduction clauses? Thanks.

Hi Folks: Can the next option year of an ID/IQ be awarded by an agency and the period of performance be extended for the current/previous option year be extended at the same time so that both options periods would technically be operational at the same time? Why or why not? Thanks!

We are a prime contractor reviewing a solicitation and negotiating a subcontract with one of our subcontractors. The initial intent was to flow-down the FAR provisions from the solicitation to the subcontractor. This subcontractor, being more savvy than most, has asked for the removal of several of the FAR provisions including FAR 52.215-2. Their reason for making this claim is that they are a commercial contractor providing commercial item to the prime under this solicitation. They have provided more than adequate proof of commerciality. My question is whether FAR 52.215-2 would apply to the subcontractor, if they truly are providing commercial items under this contract? My reading of 52.215-2(g) indicates as such, but the subcontractor is disputing this. In addition, the subcontract value is above the simplified acquisition threshold of $100K, but well below any CAS requirements of $650K. Any thoughts?

Navy Contracting beat everyone to the punch. Thank you ALL for your response. This is really helpful.

Thank you Mr. Hoffman. You may find this humorous, but I am using my well dog-eared 8/1/2008 version of the FAR which doesn't contain that language. Makes me feel pretty silly. Anyway, is it safe to say there is no debriefing requirement then for Part 16 procurements under $5 million?

We are a contractor who is a MATOC ID/IQ holder. We have repeatedly requested a Postaward Debrief from a contracting command for competitively awarded task orders. The response we continually receive from the contracting officers of that command is that the awards are made under FAR Part 16, so debriefs are not required. Our understanding of how the FAR works is that if the Task Order is competitively procured amongst the the group of MATOC ID/IQ holders, the rules of FAR 15.505 would apply. Otherwise, wouldn't FAR Part 16 have to contain all the requirements of FAR Part 15 (and the FAR would get much, much bigger)?

On the same topic of applicability of Davis-Bacon, what happens when the Davis-Bacon rates change during the life of the contract? My situation is this: We are in the 1st option year of a multi-year contract. The Davis-Bacon rates for one of my subcontractors has risen significantly from when we proposed on the contract. Does the contractor have to adjust the rates accordingly or wait until the new rates are modified into the contract by the Contracting Officer? Thanks!