ArrieS

I don't know... I've never had any interaction with ASN(RDA).

So no need for a determination in writing? Having said that, would it be best to still make a determination? Or, if factoring in the possibility of this being protested it would be best not to document that.

Hello, I am having trouble determining who would sign my J&A for Consolidation. I work for a Navy laboratory and I have a consolidation that is estimated to be $20 million. I am confused by the language in Annex 4 which says "Approval granted to increase current consolidation of contract approval thresholds from $2 Million to no more than $50 Million for STRL and less than $100 Million for Head of Contracting Activity (HCA)." Is it saying that the threshold established in FAR 7.107-2(a) is raised from $2 million to $50 million and is approved by the HCA if between $50 and $100 million? If so, who is the approving authority for below $50 million, the KO? If the threshold is raised to $50 million, does that mean the stricter requirements of FAR 7.107-2(a) are not required and there is a lower threshold for justification required implied by the increase in the threshold? Or, am I mistaken, who is the approval authority for less than $2 million and the justification requirements? I am on a small procurement team and no one has done this before so I'm in the dark and curious.

So FAR 12.301 (d) says "Other required provisions and clauses. Notwithstanding prescriptions contained elsewhere in the FAR, when acquiring commercial products or commercial services, contracting officers shall be required to use only those provisions and clauses prescribed in this part. The provisions and clauses prescribed in this part shall be revised, as necessary, to reflect the applicability of statutes and executive orders to the acquisition of commercial products or commercial services." Does "Notwithstanding prescriptions contained elsewhere in the FAR..." mean the clauses not mentioned in FAR PART 12 can still be required, or not? I have a draft solicitation that included 52.204-22 Alternate Line Item Proposal because the guidance states "Insert the provision at 52.204-22, Alternative Line Item Proposal, in all solicitations." but my PEER reviewer said to remove it. But they said to add other clauses, for example, 52.233-1, Disputes, which isn't in FAR Part 12. I guess I don't understand how to determine if a clause or provision is prescribed for FAR Part 12.

It is for a service but not construction. It's R&D which is why the base period is 2 years.

General CPARS are done after the end of the evaluation period. Is that always 12 months even if the period of performance is 24 months? Or, does the evaluation period align with whatever the period of performance is even if it is more than 12 months, without options? I had a contractor asking about their CPARS for a task order whose base period of performance is 24 months. It hasn't even been 12 months since the task order was awarded but the fact it's 24 months made me wonder. Thank you,

How were they structured?

My agency (under the NAVY) in an effort to deal with funding issues since we use incremental funding that results in multiple ACRNs and contractors need to bill by individual ACRNs has decided to implement priced SLINs. How they have decided to implement it doesn't seem to align with the PGI guidance. They will have two CLINs for one item. The first CLIN will be priced with the total overall cost of the line item. For example Labor (CPFF) which would be 0001. Next they will have a second CLIN which will be informational which will be the informational CLIN that funding will be applied to. They are just using the first CLIN 0001 for tracking and will reduce the total cost of CLIN 0001 by the funding applied by the priced SLINs to CLIN 0002. I'm fairly new but after reading and seeing the examples in the PGI this doesn't seem correct.

"Just to be clear, the vendor is a contractor, correct? If so, what type of contract are you talking about, cost reimbursement, T&M, FPI, etc.? " Yes the vendor is a contractor. It is a Cost CLIN on a CPFF contract. The question is, is the Government obligated to pay either the Material Handling Fee when the material was ordered or when it was received?

I have a vendor with an unpaid invoice. DFAS will not pay because DFAS is claiming the incorrect rates were used. The vendor ordered material in FY18, and it was not received by the government until November of FY19, and by the vendor until February of 2020. The vendor claims the rates should be the year they were incurred in their accounting system. Are they correct?

I've been conducting proposal analysis for Task Orders issued against single award IDIQs. They've all been under the certified cost and pricing data threshold. These are unique none commercial services. I.E. Modification to planes with experimental equipment to be installed and tested. For my fair and reasonable justifications I've been using and citing the various methods under 15.404-1(c) Cost analysis and making the determination using Cost analysis. I was doing this because I was relying on the other than certified cost and pricing data. My thought pattern was, evaluated cost data for the determination, I am doing cost analysis. However, after a discussion with another Contract Specialist I think I was wrong. 15.404-1(a)(2) Price analysis shall be used when certified cost or pricing data are not required (see paragraph (b) of this subsection and 15.404-3). Because the FAR states price analysis shall be used when certified cost or pricing data are not required I should have cited 15.404-1(b)(vii) Analysis of data other than certified cost or pricing data (as defined at 2.101) provided by the offeror. Which seems I'm really doing Cost Analysis but just call it Price Analysis.