Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

myfrogleaps

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    14

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About myfrogleaps

  • Rank
    New

Recent Profile Visitors

566 profile views
  1. myfrogleaps started following T4C for failing to invoice?, SAP Modification PNM, Special Standard of Responsibility Use & Application and and 2 others
  2. myfrogleaps

    SAP Modification PNM

    myfrogleaps posted a topic in Contract Administration

    I am being told that a PNM is required for all modifications. I thought PNMs were not required for FAR Part 13 mods under SAT. I would appreciate hearing other people's thoughts on the subject.
  3. myfrogleaps

    SF 1449 Block 29

    myfrogleaps posted a topic in Contract Award Process

    I am seeking clarification on the completion of Block 29. Per Block 29: "Award of Contract: ____________ Offer Dated _________. Your offer on solicitation (Block 5), including any additions or changes which are set forth herein, is accepted as to items:______________." My thought process is as follows: 1. Purchase Order are not contracts. 2. Quotations in response to Purchase Orders are not "accepted" by the government as the government is making the offer with the award of a Purchase Order which then has to be "accepted" by the Contractor. 3. The SF1449 lists both Contract and Purchase Order in Block 27b but does not list Purchase Order in Block 29. All the above leads me to concur that Block 29 is for Contracts in which the Contractor is making an offer that is accepted by the Government and does not speak to purchase orders. I have searched for instructions for the SF 1449 and found an outdated DOD copy which simply uses the term "contract." Does anyone know if there are more recent instructions? How do others interpret this? Do you complete the Block 29 for Purchase Orders as well as Contracts?
  4. myfrogleaps
    Matthew Fleharty: Thank you for responding. The way in which you contrasted the two helps me better see the difference and their applicability; especially when looking at whether or not a stipulation is discriminant.
  5. myfrogleaps
    Weno2: Thank you for pointing me to that reference. I had not read that and was not aware that the "Special Standard of Responsibility" was specificatlly for audit services.
  6. myfrogleaps
    ji20874: Your response does not help me understand the use and application of Specialist Standards of Responsibility in the least.
  7. myfrogleaps
    I am seeking some a better understanding of "Special Standards of Responsibility" as mentioned in FAR 9.104-2. I especially want to understand the relationship between "Special Standards of Responsibility" and evaluation factors. Can both be applied in the same requirements? If yes, how are they different and not the same? If not, how does one tell if they should be using one versus the other? Are "Special Standards of Responsibility" included in the solicitation and the award? I would greatly appreciate examples.
  8. myfrogleaps

    Are IAAs subject to the Contract Disputes Act?

    myfrogleaps replied to myfrogleaps's topic in Contract Administration

    At this point, I am not seeking clarification on an existing agreement nor am I seeking for people to simply quote excerpts from the FAR without clarifying their underlying assumptions when approaching the text and their subsequent interpretation of the text itself. I am simply trying to understand what Assisted Acquisition IAAs are supposed to look like when done right. Let me put it another way: The Contract Disputes Act applies to contracts made by a federal executive agency. (41 U.S. Code Sec. 7102) My present agency is an executive agency. An Assisted Acquisition is a contract according to FAR 2.101, Contract. Therefore, the Contract Disputes Act is applicable to Assisted Acquisition IAAs and that is what we should reference when outlining dispute resolution processes. Does anyone disagree or see it differently? If no one disagrees with the above, I have a further question. Assuming the Contract Dispute Act were applicable to an Assisted Acquisition IAA, would it only be applicable in the context of the buying agency's resultant contract vehicle when disputes arise between the Contractor and the "Seller" or it is also applicable to disputes between the buying agency and the selling agency?
  9. myfrogleaps

    Are IAAs subject to the Contract Disputes Act?

    myfrogleaps replied to myfrogleaps's topic in Contract Administration

    Todd Davis: I believe we are on the same page as far as how Direct and Assisted Acquisitions are defined. However, you have not directly addressed the second half of my question regarding the application of the Contract Disputes Act to Assisted Acquisitions. Please clarify.
  10. myfrogleaps
    It is my understanding that Direct Acquisition IAAs (those in which a federal employee is performing the services) are not covered under FAR Subpart 17.5 and therefore not covered by the Contracts Disputes Act but Assisted Acquisitions are covered by FAR Subpart 17.5 and therefore covered by the Contracts Disputes Act. Is this understanding correct?
  11. myfrogleaps
    Thank you Vern. Sometimes I find I just need a pointer to help define the crucial questions and parameters of a situation and you have been most helpful. I believe I understand your response and based on that understanding I am not in violation of any FAR requirement as I have a valid PR and it's up to the Contractor if he wants to pursue a claim to recover charges for contract administration labor hours.
  12. myfrogleaps
    Is the Government accepting “free” work if a Contractor chooses not to submit a claim when such a claim is justified by a Government delay and a change in SOW (out of convenience not necessity) and the CO anticipates no reason for refusal of such a claim?
  13. myfrogleaps
    Thank you all for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate the feedback.
  14. myfrogleaps
    Background: My co-worker and I disagree on a matter and I am looking for clarification to see if I am missing something. I am processing a modification for said co-worker to extend the Period of Performance only. The award was made for services as a FFP PO inclusive of 52.212-4. No other changes clauses were included. My co-worker wants to pursue issuance of a unilateral change order citing FAR 43.202 as the authority. My inclination is it is not permissible to issue a unilateral change order to the contract as the changes clauses included specifically states “Changes in the terms and conditions of this contract may be made only by written agreement of the parties.” Based on 52.212-4, it seems to me that it would be a breach of contract terms on the Government’s part if the CO were to issue a unilateral change order on this contract. Questions: Does the FAR permit issuance of a unilateral change order extending the Period of Performance end date under a Firm-Fixed-Price Purchase Order for services containing 52.212-4 and no other changes clauses? Does FAR 43.202 give Contracting Officers the authority to issue a unilateral change order against any contract? Is it permissible to cite FAR 43.202 as the authority?
×