Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

WC79

Members
  • Posts

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I have a very general question, would a contractor that providing onsite support service be eligible for government rideshare (benefit providing subsidy for metro and bus cost) program thru the government organization?
  2. Are you saying that this is an unauthorized commitment because the CO lacks the authority to move forward with a sole source requirement?
  3. FAR Part 6 applies to this requirement Let me add clarity to this. The acquisition office (making the award) went about making an award without getting the necessary approvals (sole source justification). After the award was made the sole source justification was submitted for approval (submitted to Head of Contracting Activity).
  4. If an acquisition office provides a sole source justification after the award of a contract, what exactly is this in violation of? The approval to sole source was never received prior to issue of the solicitation. If the approval comes after the award of the contract, what type of violation is this?
  5. Why wouldnt prohibition (FAR 16.301-3(b)) in the FAR apply to this?
  6. Quick question - When awarding a task order from a commercial vehicle like NITAAC (which is a GWAC that provides IT services and supplies)(FAR 16.5)) for IT services, can you award a cost-reimbursement task order? According to FAR 16.301-3(b) The use of cost-reimbursement contracts is prohibited for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services . I was wondering if this also applies to FAR 16.5.
  7. FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(c) - Justification for limiting sources states "In the interest of economy and efficiency, the new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures. The original order or BPA must not have been previously issued under sole-source or limited-sources procedures." I need help on the interpretation of the statement "in the interest of economy and efficiency" . Does anyone know how this portion is being defined?
  8. I've added a bit of information to the original topic. Who covers the cost (of testing)when testing is not provided onsite and the contractor has to seek out testing in order to gain access.
  9. COVID-19 testing (screening tests) for onsite access to government facilities for unvaccinated contractors, who covers the cost of the testing when it (testing) is not provided at the government facility and the contractor has to seek out testing? Should the contractors employer be held responsible for covering the cost of testing. Or should the government cover the cost. If contractor access to the government site is required who covers the cost?
  10. Just curious. In the instance of a self imposed ceiling why would a LSJ be needed?
  11. I recently received a question concerning BPA total dollar limitations and what action might be needed to increase that amount. My agency has a requirement that approaching the total dollar limitation and our program folks would like to increase the total dollar limitation. Understanding that a BPA is not a contract, does anyone have experience in handling situations like this. Ordinarily this would warrant a J&A to increase the total dollar amount or a within scope modification.
  12. I agree, the contract was researched and everyone was clear that the contract did not prohibit its use. I've never came a across this before and wanted to make sure i wasnt missing anything.
  13. Thanks this is helpful. Was this a case you were familiar with? if not how were able to find this case. I tried searching several times but couldn't find anything.
  14. Thats correct. The consultant is being proposed as key personnel on the contract and is not an employee of the contractor. Is this possible?
×
×
  • Create New...