PepeTheFrog

Members
  • Content count

    157
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PepeTheFrog

  • Rank
    Bronze Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,368 profile views
  1. Well, it sounds like you made a conclusion based on an analysis of your contract. Does the corporate, internal policy of one DoD contractor somehow apply to contracts between DoD and other, different contractors? It sounds like you will be "out of compliance" with the corporate, internal policy of your former employer. They might be very disappointed with you, but probably not.
  2. You want an independent contractor to perform services for your company as a consultant. Nobody can stop you. You want to know if you can subcontract work from your DoD prime contract with this consultant, and if so, what conditions apply. Presumably, you want to know this information so you can get reimbursed by the DoD or so you can avoid violating a clause of your DoD contract. A separate matter. What does your contract with the DoD say?
  3. End federal subsidies and guarantees of student loans, subject student loans to actual scrutiny and expected value, and watch college enrollment drop like a rock, college tuition prices drop like a rock, and majors like "gender studies" disappear almost entirely. "Higher education" is a racket that blew a $1T+ bubble.
  4. Do you work for a federal agency? If so, which one?
  5. PepeTheFrog's curiosity has shifted to utter bewilderment. shall7, please, PepeTheFrog begs you, share your thoughts: 1. Are you aware that if you were to switch out your federal badge for a contractor badge, you would remain the same person? 2. Why do you seem to imply that the results will be better if federal employees of FAI or DAU create or teach courses, rather than non-federal employees? 3. Have you sat through more than two DAU courses? Have you sat through more than two industry courses? Which ones? What was your experience? 4. In your interests you listed entrepreneurship and capitalism. What do you like about entrepreneurship and capitalism?
  6. Are you aware that the Federal Acquisition Institute (FAI, the non-DoD civilian agency counterpart to Defense Acquisition University) operates entirely on the business model you seem to think is completely backwards? FAI hires contractors to teach civilian agency employees. PepeTheFrog thinks you really, really need to re-think this one. It seems like you think only federal employees should teach other federal employees...is this a joke?
  7. Yes. Hire a plane to fly a banner about the solicitation across Daytona Beach, just make sure you use FBO.gov. If PepeTheFrog is wrong about this, someone please hop in and clarify.
  8. Bring back the civil service exam! Make civil service great (and respectable) again!
  9. predicate: will be deemed to be extended If [something], and [something], the time specified for receipt of proposals (SUBJECT) will be deemed to be extended (PREDICATE) [to this].
  10. FAR 2.101 defines "Governmentwide point of entry (GPE)" as "the single point where Government business opportunities greater than $25,000, including synopses of proposed contract actions, solicitations, and associated information, can be accessed electronically by the public." It also states "The GPE is located at http://www.fedbizopps.gov ." There is no DFAR. There is a Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS). There is no such thing as "more than one Government Point of Entry." There is only the GPE. See FAR 2.101. If your question is "Does FAR 4.502(b)(4) prohibit posting a solicitation in the GPE and also somewhere else?" then PepeTheFrog thinks the answer is "no." You satisfied FAR 4.502(b)(4) by posting it in the GPE (FBO.gov). Then, you also stapled a copy of it to the wall in your agency's bathroom, or posted it on another website, or painted it on a billboard. No problem. You get in trouble with bid protests if you fail to post the solicitation in the GPE (FBO.gov). Post it wherever else you want as long as you also post it to FBO. The idea is that no potential contractors should have to find your billboard, website, or bathroom. They should be able to look at FBO.gov and find your solicitation.
  11. Refreshingly candid and accurate account. PepeTheFrog enjoyed it.
  12. The last time PepeTheFrog Googled "REA vs claim," the first result is an article from this website: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=REA+vs+claim The second result is also from this website-- from the great Vern Edwards! Both were good reads and handy references for the layman. In the first article, the author states that some federal lawyers "advise the Contracting Officer to ignore or deny most REAs to force the contractor to submit a CDA claim to obtain relief." PepeTheFrog hopes this is not widespread, but has regretfully seen this more than once with clients. Doesn't that practice seem to fly in the face of FAR 1.102-2(c): "Conduct business with integrity, fairness, and openness"? Has anyone else seen this type of "stonewall" from a federal agency, forcing the contractor to submit a claim under the Contract Disputes Act? Also, a response deadline for an REA seems reasonable and analogous to the response deadline for a claim, but what is the next step? For a claim, lack of response means it's a "deemed denial" and you can appeal to the Court of Federal Claims. When your REA is ignored, you convert it into a claim for, as some have said, the "nuclear option." What would be the consequence of the federal agency not responding to the REA in a timely manner?
  13. PepeTheFrog is calling for a complete and total shutdown of the omission of the Oxford comma until we can figure out what the heck is going on. We have no choice, folks. No choice! Any contracting professional who does not use the Oxford comma must be deported immediately.
  14. The federal government tries to "step into the shoes of private industry" as much as possible when procuring commercial items. Whether or not they do a good job of that is a separate question. Commercial contracts and solicitations should contain the FAR 52.212-X family of clauses. FAR 52.212-4(c) states that changes to the contract must be bilateral ("only by written agreement by the parties"). In contrast, non-commercial contracts will usually have some form of the infamous Changes clause, which allows the contracting officer to issue unilateral modifications within certain parameters, depending on the specific Changes clause. That's a big deal: Commercial contracts are generally not subject to the Changes clause. As you noted, commercial contracts should be* exempt from certification of cost and pricing data under the Truth In Negotiations Act (TINA). (They renamed the statute, but old frogs will always call her TINA, that devilish women!) See FAR 15.403-1(b)(3) and 15.403-1(c)(3). *Never underestimate the ability of the government to bully you into doing something. Just remember: When you ask about "selling" as non-commercial...it's really the federal government that decides to acquire or procure the item as commercial or non-commercial. It's also the contracting officer who will make the commercial item determination.
  15. This was an interesting read...