Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About sackanator

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Rocky Mountains

Recent Profile Visitors

1,083 profile views
  1. I reached out to the contracting officer of the FSS that was used to order the machine. I have a concern about the listing under contract GS-21F-XXXXX. They list the machine as a made in United States of America. We did an award for this product stating All applicable FAR and DFARS clauses and provisions are applicable. After awarding a contract to this company and seeing that the product was made in America, we did not apply FAR part 25.105 for reasonableness of cost. This was a small business set aside, thus a 12% incl
  2. The product was a Manford machine http://www.manford.com.tw/. There is no indication that " they do not know where it will be coming from (since they are not buying from the original manufacturer)". The duty free waiver for the product coming from Taiwan with a value of Foreign Supplies $52,000 and total dollar value approximately $92,000 to me shows they knew they would be buying direct from the manufacturer. This was done as an RFQ on GSA E-Buy, during the solicitation period the company rep that provided the quote for the Manford called me from Taiwan.
  3. Yep I did, just kidding. I haven't spent enough time to be in complete understanding of the different terms under that FAR part.
  4. Taiwan is a qualified country under the WTO GPA. Since this requirement was a small business set aside, if FAR 25.401(a)(1) lists acquisitions set aside for small businesses as an exception to the Trade Agreements, would I still be able to consider products from Taiwan, Italy or any of the other WTO GPA's under set asides to small business?
  5. I did include a statement on the E-Buy RFQ "All applicable FAR, DFARS & AFARS clauses and provisions apply to this RFQ" knowing that GSA does not include DoD or AFARS clauses in their awards. Not sure if that would hold much weight in a court room or is considered a proper statement. There were two quotes received. My concern is that on GSA Advantage they list their product as made in the USA, thus no reason to evaluate their quote under FAR 25.105(a-c) since both quotes said that the products were made in the USA. The quote that won was just slightly less than second lowes
  6. DFARS 225.872-1(a) if I read it correctly states, "DoD has determined it inconsistent with the public interest to apply restrictions of the Buy American statute or the Balance of Payments Program", which I thought to understand this pointed to FAR 25.103(a) for exemptions of the BAA.
  7. Background: FFP contract award using GSA, publicized on GSA E-Buy as a small business set-aside. Award amount was $92,112.00 which included a program counsel for operating the machine. On GSA the product is listed as Made in America, at least for the main component currently listed at $43,002.52. A duty free waiver was submitted to this office for Foreign supplier with a "Value of Foreign Supplies = $52,000.00". Taiwan is not listed as qualifying country DFARS 225.872-1 & 225.003 (10). Since it appears that over 50% of the value of the item is made in Taiwan, and Taiwan isn't a
  8. As always when I have read posts that you have commented on Vern, I thank you for providing a trail to follow that will help make a little more sense of the subject. I would have tried providing a bit more info with the question but my home computer is touchy with some government websites.
  9. Wondering if anyone can elaborate on the 52.222-52&53 Provision/Clause. Would it be ideal for small dollar buys above the micro such as lodging/catered meals/porta-john cleaning? Been researching and trying to fully understand lodging and some items that are cloudy/greyish concerning if they are a service or not. FAR 22.1003-5(d) lists Food Service and lodging as covered under Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS). Seems pretty straight forward. Being under the Army umbrella they make it pretty time consuming for anything to fall under the classification of "Service". T
  10. I thank you for the replys, it was a co-workers requirement he was managing who was asking questions which I wasn't overly sure in responding. As I am further exploring this award there appears to be a whole slew of problems so I might have to stop here and thank heaven that it is not mine to administer. The comments above will give me a foundation to research, thank you. In response to the one question is was considered a supply since the bulk of the cost was assigned to the supply/furniture.
  11. Contract to a government agency, ohh lets say UNICOR for furniture and installation of that furniture. In the process of furniture installation they do damage to government property (the floor and walls). They have been told to fix the damage they cause around 6 months or longer. They still have not taken action. Is there a clause, legal case dealing with damage to government property and a timelyness to fix/correct the issue? Especially when its a government agency that caused the damage? Everything I've found in the FAR seems to deal with damage to government furnished property especia
  • Create New...