Jump to content

Neil Roberts

Members
  • Posts

    914
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Neil Roberts

  1. 7 hours ago, cdhames said:

    Schedule delay by the Gov.  Half of the PO is delivery.  Half of the PO is removal/installation and disposal.  Delivery completed, an initial attempt at install, call it mobilization and they arrived at the site before being turned away.  Think it goes without saying why we would think they should not be paid for the removal/install and instead negotiate a settlement and descope.

     

    sounds to me that they were ready, willing and able and the Government caused the failure to install.

  2. My opinion is "yes," if the estimated value of all the calls together (or appropriated funds) are over the micro-purchase threshold at the time the BPA is established. That to me is most consistent with the FAR definition of an acquisition:
    Acquisition means the acquiring by contract with appropriated funds of supplies or services (including construction) by and for the use of the Federal Government through purchase or lease, whether the supplies or services are already in existence or must be created, developed, demonstrated, and evaluated. Acquisition begins at the point when agency needs are established and includes the description of requirements to satisfy agency needs, solicitation and selection of sources, award of contracts, contract financing, contract performance, contract administration, and those technical and management functions directly related to the process of fulfilling agency needs by contract.

  3. 2 hours ago, Fobbulous said:

    What authority can be used to stop work or delivery of items if the Stop Work Clause, Suspension of Work Clause or other similar language was not included in a commercial contract?

    You are probably thinking from the government view, and I was hoping that the Government would provide such guidance. However, from the contractor side, there are a few common law concepts that are applicable in contracts even if not specifically incorporated. They could afford a contractor a defense for delaying performance or even cancelling the contract due to a shutdown.

  4. 4 hours ago, govt2310 said:

    For a micro-purchase, the FAR clauses on Termination for Default/Cause/Convenience are not required to be put into the Contract. 

    What does "the" contract consist of? Documents, clauses, Statement of work, etc. Was there a meeting of the minds, describe what was sold and bought in "the" contract, what went wrong and what is the factual basis for default or termination, or is this just an intellectual exercise? 

  5. 3 hours ago, Fair and Reasonable said:

    If the government really wants to see their price buildup they could ask for a sealed package, but we weren't intending on asking the sub for an unsanitized cost volume - just their rates. 

    Your prime contract should include 52.244-2 under which a T&M subcontract requires customer consent/advance notice. The information the customer "wants to see" is stated therein. I have never heard of a "sealed package" but hope it meets all information requirements of this clause.

  6. 26 minutes ago, tranceaddict said:

    Since the requirements have decreased by more than 10%, the Govt would like to get some fee back. Presumably, this will also affect Cost.

    A certain amount of the under run may be due to lower cost incurred having nothing or little to do with a decrease in the requirements. How is this contemplated to be handled by the government and/or the contractor? Are such costs required to be segregated accounting wise? lt is not clear to me if it is understood that there is no rebate of costs actually incurred, just a change in the estimated cost. Did the contractor notify the government? Do you wish to do this now or are you facing spending time and energy with a contract of vacillating increase or decrease in requirements? How much fee dollars are really potentially at stake? Is it worth it? 

  7. For your information, I am providing the following:

    1. 31.205-7 Contingencies.

    (a) "Contingency," as used in this subpart, means a possible future event or condition arising from presently known or unknown causes, the outcome of which is indeterminable at the present time.

    (b) Costs for contingencies are generally unallowable for historical costing purposes because such costing deals with costs incurred and recorded on the contractor’s books. However, in some cases, as for example, terminations, a contingency factor may be recognized when it is applicable to a past period to give recognition to minor unsettled factors in the interest of expediting settlement.

    (c) In connection with estimates of future costs, contingencies fall into two categories:

    (1) Those that may arise from presently known and existing conditions, the effects of which are foreseeable within reasonable limits of accuracy; e.g., anticipated costs of rejects and defective work. Contingencies of this category are to be included in the estimates of future costs so as to provide the best estimate of performance cost.

    (2) Those that may arise from presently known or unknown conditions, the effect of which cannot be measured so precisely as to provide equitable results to the contractor and to the Government; e.g., results of pending litigation. Contingencies of this category are to be excluded from cost estimates under the several items of cost, but should be disclosed separately (including the basis upon which the contingency is computed) to facilitate the negotiation of appropriate contractual coverage. (See, for example, 31.205-6(g) and 31.205-19.)

    2. If your focus is (c)(1), you should be able to articulate in detail in relation to each high risk supplier, in writing, the critical threat and vulnerability and how it is to be limited by what expenditure and $ amount for what. After all, you are required have a thorough risk management plan.  

    3. I am surprised that it looks to me like your company put an additional arbitrary dollar amount into its prior proposals, and on the negotiation table, and the government just bought into it without any comment or question or rationale from the contractor??

    4. I don't think there is a magic "number" that anyone has that you could or should just borrow outright for your company and its statement of work requirements.

    5. It was not clear to me whether the 10% was an internal management challenge that comes out of the amount negotiated with the customer or whether the customer pays for it. If your large company has been successful in the past with whatever it has done, maybe there is no reason to change.

     
     
  8. The date the paperwork was signed and the date the initial proposal is due is not, in my opinion, relevant to your quoted sentence. You may wish to do some FAR/CFR research as to the term "submits" and verify that your company "submitted" a written self-certification and price on or before September 2nd. There may be situations where the time of day of the submission is important. For example, if you successfully "submitted" on the West coast at 9:01 pm, and the requirement is interpreted by East coast time, it was September 3rd on the East coast at the time of submission and your firm does not qualify. 

  9. @JGJohn, there seem to be multiple aspects of your quest. To address some to begin with:

    1. The prime is required to flow all prime contact included mandatory flowdowns to the supplier regardless of supplier contract type. In addition, the prime should flow any and all other provisions needed to ensure that the prime contract obligations are met.

    2. There is nothing that I am aware of that prohibits a prime contractor from flowing a cost type contract to a supplier, which normally includes fee. Not clear to me what you are worrying about when you say "fee on fee situation." Is there a particular FAR or Agency regulation you have in mind, or ???

    3. Please clarify what DCAA concern there is with a FFP supplier contract.

    4. What did the prime contractor propose to the government for this subcontract work, if at all?

    5. What do you mean by FFP Award Fee subcontract? This sounds contradictory...paying a supplier a firm fixed price then awarding an additional amount for doing its job.    

  10. 3 hours ago, formerfed said:

    Some agencies tie this into items like demonstrated cooperation, communications, collaboration, partnering, etc.  It can be assessed through several means including conversations with clients, customers, and other business partners.  

    it sounds like these "items" may not be an actual solicitation criteria and it does not include protest filings and results as an actual stated solicitation criteria. I am assuming there is nothing in writing that controls this type criteria?

  11. On 9/14/2023 at 1:03 PM, Don Mansfield said:

    I don't understand what you can conclude about an offeror's ability to perform a contract based on the volume of protests they have filed. What does one have to do with the other? 

    I can conclude that they are litigious in nature, which has been described by synonyms such as combative, contentious, disruptive and argumentative. I believe I take that into account every day in dealing with people and companies. It is expensive and mentally unhealthy compared to other options. The government would need to figure out how to define that in order to take that "quality" into account such that it is objective.

  12. 19 hours ago, bob7947 said:

    Contractors  and offerors have the legal right granted them by federal law to protest an award and dispute a contracting officer' decision.  You all know that!  You CANNOT penalize them, for them employing their rights.  If a government agency is going to use any device to punish an offferor or contractor for using their legal rights, you better have a cause that can hold up in some legal forum.

    Based on the posts, it sounds like a change in the right should be considered in this regulation/statute. For example, in California, you cannot file more than 2 Small Claims court actions for more than $2,500 anywhere in California in a calendar year even though providing a civil remedy for peoples' grievances is generally ingrained. 

  13. 9 minutes ago, Atlas STS said:

    Does my accounting system or cost estimation system even meet the standards for being complete?  How would I know?

    @Atlas STS, this is why I previously said does your company have a certified public accountant (CPA) report that it meets Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)? Having such a successful review is about as good a warm and fuzzy as you could reasonably expect, and I think you will find many small businesses doing business with the government have done so. Spend the money.

  14. On 8/24/2023 at 8:59 AM, Atlas STS said:

    DFARS 252.215-7010 (especially (b)(ii)(E)) which states that NTDC qualify for an exception from certified cost or pricing data

    My take on (E) is that it is a subparagraph of commercial product or commercial service and only one of several pieces of potential information (see subparagraphs above it), for those who are applying to have an exception granted for its commercial product or service. In any event it is government discretionary to grant it, not a contractor right. I read (A) thru (E) as if the words "commercial product or commercial service" appeared in front of the word "items." 

  15. 4 hours ago, joel hoffman said:

    Doesn’t that answer your question here? Seems clear and unambiguous to me.

    @Joel Hoffman. I think the post is asking why the debriefing notice was given at 9.5M, if it is clear that it is required only at 10.M...are there scenarios regarding how the contract award value is seen, or was it a gratuitous notice given by the government?  

    is

  16. 18 hours ago, Don Mansfield said:

    What do you mean by "authority"? Do you think that a contracting officer wouldn't have the authority to extend a contract when the contractor experienced an excusable delay if the contract didn't contain the Default clause?

    Hi Don. What I meant by "authority" was that a clause is included in a contract when a FAR prescription says to include it. I can't properly answer your question because I haven't thought about it, nothing offhand comes to mind, and do not have the time right now.

  17. 2 hours ago, Retreadfed said:

     The audit does not measure whether your accounting system is compliant with the CAS.

     

    @Atlas STS may be concerned with this small businesses' accounting system itself, not with whether it is compliant with CAS. Shouldn't the accounting system in use be capable of and report certain financial data to support the cost or pricing data requirements. What would a goverment audit report likely say if the accounting system is a shoebox that you have to sift through to hopefully find the support for the cost or pricing data submitted to the government? 

×
×
  • Create New...