Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

aordway

Members
  • Content Count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About aordway

  • Rank
    New

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @Don MansfieldI will have to inquire as to if the contractor meets the definition of nontraditional defense contractor or not, but I had not considered that as a method of making certified cost or pricing data exempt. Thanks for that suggestion. If we assume they are not a nontraditional defense contractor (for argument's sake), then to sum up where we stand thus far, a non-commercial purchase in which a fair and reasonable determination can be made without the need for cost or pricing data (because cost or pricing data by definition is information that includes or supports cost elements,
  2. Hmm I thought we were on the same page there. This makes it seem like certified cost or pricing data is required prior to award of a negotiated contract above the threshold (it does not make the need of that info by the contracting officer to make a fair and reasonable determination as a condition for its requirement). As a result, I understood the word "required" in FAR 15.404-1(a)(3) to reference only these two factors; above the threshold, and a negotiated contract. However it seems you view the word "required" in FAR 15.404-1(a)(3) to mean "needed by the contracting officer to mak
  3. That is not what the FAR says, IMO, and that is not what Don said, IMO. @ji20874 what Don just now said in item #1 of his post (When certified cost or pricing data are required, cost analysis is required and price analysis should also be conducted) and what you say you agree with seems identical to me to the statement I made in your first post, in which I said "when cost or pricing data is required (i.e. when the contract is over $2M), fair and reasonable price determination must be made through the cost analysis method" and you said you do NOT agree. Help me understand how you agre
  4. @Don Mansfield Thanks. If that is the case, can you expand upon what your initial post was trying to convey? I feel like I am getting mixed messages. My initial question was "Is 15.404-1(a)(3) trying to say that (a) WHEN individual cost elements have been proposed (or when a Contracting Officer has requested they be submitted/proposed), they must be evaluated using cost analysis, OR is it trying to say that (b) cost analysis must always occur when certified cost or pricing data is required? Stated another way, could we do only a price analysis when certified cost or pricing data is requi
  5. @ji20874 That's what logic would tell me makes sense, however that appears to be the opposite of what Don stated. I'm curious what you take Don's initial response to mean. Or perhaps @Don Mansfield can let us know if he agrees with your post or not. I would also note that it says cost analysis SHALL be used, and price analysis SHOULD be used. It does not use "shall" in both instances. Also, it does not require cost analysis when cost elements are submitted, but rather when certified cost or pricing data is required, which is at $2M. Although what I think you stated is how i thought it should
  6. @Retreadfed I'm just talking about fair and reasonable price determination. FAR 15.404-1(a)(3) says "Cost analysis shall be used to evaluate the reasonableness of individual cost elements when certified cost or pricing data are required." That appears to say, and with Don's guidance, that when cost or pricing data is required (i.e. when the contract is over $2M), fair and reasonable price determination must be made through the cost analysis method. It does not say "when certified cost or pricing data is submitted" or "when certified cost or pricing data is requested", but says "when required"
  7. Thanks @Don Mansfield. This would be for DOD, so the FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(ii)(B) allowance could not apply. How does that jive with DFARS PGI 215.404-1(c)(i) where it says "When the contracting officer cannot obtain sufficient data to perform a price analysis in accordance with the pricing steps in FAR 15.404-1(b), a cost analysis is required." In my example, we do have enough pricing data to perform a price analysis. The DFARS seems to say try and do a price analysis first and foremost. I guess 15.404-1(b) is missing something that says "unless you are over the cost or pricing data thres
  8. Can someone help me understand FAR 15.404-1(a)(3)? It says: "Cost analysis shall be used to evaluate the reasonableness of individual cost elements when certified cost or pricing data are required. Price analysis should be used to verify that the overall price offered is fair and reasonable." Is 15.404-1(a)(3) trying to say that WHEN individual cost elements have been proposed (or when a Contracting Officer has requested they be submitted/proposed), they must be evaluated using cost analysis, OR is it trying to say that cost analysis must always occur when certified cost or pricing
  9. On the SF30 form used for contract modifications, Block 1 ways "CONTRACT ID CODE", and the instructions for filling out the SF30 on page 2 says "Insert the contract type identification code that appears in the title block of the contract being modified." What is the SF30 form looking for us to insert in this block? I could not locate a field called "contract type identification code" or anything similar on common award documents (SF26 and SF1449). My logical assumption is that it just wants the 9th digit in the Procurement Instrument Identifier(PIID) [e.g. C for contracts or P for Purchase Or
  10. Thanks @Don Mansfield, I think "constructive waiver of right to be paid" is a great way to look at it, rather than viewing it as a supplemental agreement to the contract as I had been. I can definitely get on board with that. @Ibn Battuta It comes from the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) via PARC Policy Alert #18-46 (written in 2018), which states you should not issue a contract mod in any circumstance, and that guidance rescinds and updates PARC Policy Alert #13-39 (written in 2013) which previously stated you should not do a mod unless t
  11. Thank you. The Red Book and FAR 43 references seem to say that IF you are doing a mod, they must be done in accordance with those regulations, but they do not address the need for a mod in the first place. 31 USC 1501 seems to say that you only record an obligation when you have a valid contract (meeting the definition of "contract"); I'm not entirely convinced it answers the question of needing to adjust an obligation downward (but if you did choose to adjust an obligation downward, it would need t be a binding agreemnt in writing before you did so).
×
×
  • Create New...