Jump to content

MDH-1102

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks ji20874! While that seems like a great idea I am afraid our KO's follow a methodology of "that was never done before so we aren't going to do it now". Believe me it is frustrating at best joel hoffman, that is exactly my point, thank you!
  2. Thanks Vern! Without getting too much into the weeds...the delay is revolving around FYE budget? The team can not get to the location until the second week of October. I was not asking for a delay of months but rather 2-3 weeks. I should also note that the contractor was on board with postponing the NTP until such time the PDT was able to do a kickoff meeting. Are the legal consequences that you are referring to initiated by the contractor?
  3. I am a PM that deals with DB contracts on a regular basis. The issue I am currently having is the contracting officer dating the NTP the moment the bonds are approved by legal, effectively starting the clock on the contractors POP. Under normal circumstances this doesn't represent an issue but every once in a while a delay of 10,15, 20 days is warranted. When I asked the contracting officer to hold off on issuing the NTP or to make the effective date later on in the month I am getting serious push back. My question is, Is the date the NTP issued a unilateral decision of the contracting officer or should it be a PDT discussion? Is there any guidance that mandates the NTP has to be issued within so many days of award? thank you
  4. Thanks Don for the insightful response...(mostly joking but also with a bit of sarcasm).
  5. Recently my office is having a lively debate regarding the DD2579, specifically block "10j". Side #1 If your requirement is a Task Order off of a SATOC would it be appropriate to select "multiple award" then subsequently "Delivery/Task Order". The argument basically stems from the "SA" in SATOC stands for Single Award...how could selecting "multiple award be appropriate"? Side #2 Some of the COs feel that they are misrepresenting their recommendation if they select "multiple award". After all they are only requesting a Task Order. Therefor any TO SATOC or MATOC they do not select that button (10j) Side #3 Why does Small business Office even care if it is a TO or not?
  6. I agree, and to add a little more...PGI 253.219-70 (b)(2) clearly states that a DD2579 is not required for actions covered in FAR part 8
  7. I recently became a Small Business Professional for an Army installation. Before my current position I spent many years as a Contract Specialist as well as a Contracting Officer. As for my following questions, I am familiar with the "book" answer and all the FAR/DFAR/PGI references, what I would like to discuss is reality... 1. As the SB Professional where are my right and left boundaries? Keeping it as simple as possible, I feel my job is to ensure the maximum opportunities possible go to small business. I do this primarily by review and conducting MR. If the rule of two can be satisfied I push for a SB set-aside (or socioeconomic what ever is applicable). Is it that simple? I know there are many factors that go into an Acq. plan (politics, schedule etc ) but is politics and schedule something that the SMP should be concerned with? If you look at the requirement holistically, yes I should be concerned with those topics. BUT if I were to "stay in my small business lane" all I should be concerned with is qualified SB contracts and that we would receive fair and reasonable prices. 2. What is the spirt of block 18 of the DD 2579? My take is that as the SMP, I make RECOMMENDATIONS the Contracting Officer makes DECSIONS. If there is a disagreement and a "non-concur" is recorded, block 18 allows the Contracting Officer to continue forward. In my office a "non-concur" is looked at as a personal insult. I don't understand that and I want the opinion of the group.
×
×
  • Create New...