Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About UGA40

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. No there is not, good point
  2. to me, 15.206(e) addresses cancellation in a competitive situation but does not address sole source. 15.206(a) seems to imply amending if there is a change in requirements/terms and conditions.
  3. What authority authorizes the PCO to rescind the RFP in a sole source environment?
  4. UGA40

    Task Order PoP Extension

    Vern, I misread paragraph (a)(3) of Alt V to read delivery rather than "place of delivery"......
  5. UGA40

    Task Order PoP Extension

    Thanks Vern. So I assume that a bilateral, equitable adjustment, through the changes clause would be the answer.
  6. Can you extend a task order's Period of Performance on a sole source contract through the changes clause? The PoP for the task order is well within the PoP for the base, but the task order does not contain the 52.217-8 clause. There is not an excusable delay, but an R&D effort that needs increased scope to get to a new requirement.
  7. UGA40

    Does MIL-SPEC Constitue Brand Name

    @Seeker ; @ Jamaal ; Thanks a bunch
  8. UGA40

    Does MIL-SPEC Constitue Brand Name

    Thanks Jamaal. It just seems that if only two manufacturers can meet the specification it is limiting competition.
  9. We are having a discussion in our office pertaining to a new requirement. It is for a supply that must meet a certain MIL-SPEC. Market Research has determined that only 2 manufacturers are able to produce the supply that meets the MIL-SPEC. Does this constitute a brand name justification? On one hand any vendor can provide the product if it meets the MIL-SPEC, but on the other hand only 2 sources are able to supply the product which seems to limit competition.