Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

994 profile views
  1. Would really appreciate some feedback; we have several cost type contracts > $100M. Based on my interpretation, I think they are non-compliant because they are not FFP. When you read the reference below do you interpret it to mean (i) or (ii) or (iii) or (iv) must be met or (i)(ii)(iii) or (iv) must be met? I interpret the latter you have to meet (i) & (ii) and either (iii) or (iv). D) (1) No task or delivery order contract in an amount estimated to exceed $100 million (including all options) may be awarded to a single source unless the head of the agency determines in writing that— (i) The task or delivery orders expected under the contract are so integrally related that only a single source can reasonably perform the work; (ii) The contract provides only for firm-fixed price (see 16.202) task or delivery orders for— (A) Products for which unit prices are established in the contract; or (B) Services for which prices are established in the contract for the specific tasks to be performed; (iii) Only one source is qualified and capable of performing the work at a reasonable price to the Government; or (iv) It is necessary in the public interest to award the contract to a single source due to exceptional circumstances.
  2. It's become common practice to issue a task order simultaneous with the contract award. I take exception with the practice because a task order is issued to every awardee for the minimum amount. I think this definitely violates the bona fide need rule; there is no need/requirement. Only the need to meet a perception that a task order must be issued upon award of the contract. I was advised the AFFARs states “reporting the required obligation using anything other than a delivery/task order will result in the action not being reported in FPDS-NG.”. I have been unable to access the referenced language myself...technology
  3. ji20874 and Retreadfed, thank you both. I completely understand it now. I work for the Air Force. I searched the AFFARS and MPs; but, have yet to find guidance on the rules on recording of obligations. I will continue my search and thank you both again.
  4. I don't understand what you mean by your statement
  5. Per FMR Vol 3, Chapter 8 para 080604 "Where the quantity required under a contract is indefinite, the ultimate amount of obligation is determined by subsequent orders; the amount of any required minimum order specified in the contract, however, must be recorded as an obligation upon execution of the contract." Question: In regards to the MACC contract, the minimum is $2000 and the maximum is $9M; there are multiple awards. In order to be compliant with the above, am I required to immediately issue a task order to each awardee for $2000 or does issuing a task order to one awardee for at least the minimum $2000 meet "an obligation upon execution of the contract"?
  6. The employer issued the PIP. They Government has never had an issue with the work I provide; they were quite please with my work until the new COR arrived.
  7. ji20874, I do the job assigned; I have 20 years of contrating experience, military, federal and corporate. I know the difference between FAR 13 and FAR 8...thank you. I don't have a problem with following regulations or any written guidance; I do have a problem when people feel free to inject their personal preference that adds no value. I thought this discussion board was used as a way to gather information in areas where an individual lacked knowledged apparently I was wrong. For those that did pass along useful information, thank you.
  8. The contract was awarded under FAR Part 8. I provide cradle to grave contracting support. Vern, when it became an issue 3 months ago; I addressed it with the COR...he pretty much dismissed me. So, I addressed it with my PM; as a result of that conversation, I received a Performance Improvement Plan. I have also addressed it with the COR's supervisor... no results. Prior to this individual becoming the COR, I was assigned my task and left to complete them. Now, the new COR tells me how to do everything right down to how to create a routing sheet. All based on personal preference and not regulations. It is affecting my productivity. I'm not whining; I just want to be left alone; so, I can do my job. I did lots of research and apparently I have to file an EEO compliant prior to filing a lawsuit. I'm looking for any written guidance I present which states CORs cannot interfere with the contractor's work. I know the Air force has such written guidance.
  9. I currently work for a federal contractor providing acquisition support under a blanket purchase agreement without a statement of work. I am familiar with FAR 13.303, Blanket Purchase Agreements; however, it does not state that a SOW is required for services. It simply states "the following terms and conditions are mandatory: (1) Description of agreement. A statement that the supplier shall furnish supplies or services, described in general terms" What recourse is there when the COR dictates how the work is accomplished since there is no SOW?
  • Create New...