Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

California2012

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About California2012

  • Rank
    New

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Actually I very much appreciate their feedback. This is why these forums exist - so we can leverage our collective experiences and knowledge and help one another. It's not like lawyers have all the right answers either. It's up to me as the OP to decide whether and how to take the feedback.
  2. Hi Joel - thank you. The Contracting Officer would not answer that question. Yes, there is an org chart required to be submitted with the RFP as part of the technical proposal.
  3. We submitted a bid to an RFP in September 2019. Our bid was valid for 90 days per the solicitation. They then wrote back asking for a 45 day extension, to which we agreed. That 45-day window is almost up, and they've yet to award. They've now come back asking for another 30 day extension. I therefore have several questions please: Since by the time of award (in mid March), almost 6 months would have passed since the bid submission date, I may have shifted some resources to other projects that have opened up to me. In other words, I had planned our resources for the project to start by Jan at the latest. Now, it looks like it may start by late March at the earliest, assuming they don't come back asking for a third extension. My questions are: (1) If we agree to the extension, and assuming we are awarded the contract but I cannot remobilize my resources to meet the NTP quickly enough, can I decline the award without repercussions? (2) If we decline the extension, can we still ask for feedback on our proposal, particularly the technical part where we feel we could use the feedback to help us in refining future proposals? I've reviewed the FARs and all and honestly can't find a conclusive answer on what happens if you're rewarded a contract (after several extension requests) but choose not to accept it. Any guidance appreciated.
  4. This is for an upcoming contract that is still in the bidding stage. We need to arrive at an estimate for the coefficient, and that needs to include the items under the "Adjustment Factors" heading in the file attached. You will notice that it says the Adjustment Factor (ie coefficient) needs to include "project management and project supervision." However, a few pages later in that same UPB document, the very first section contains monthly wage rates for a long list of roles. So for instance, it says the monthly wage rate for a "Contract Administrator" is $2,834. Now I know that we'd want to have a Contract Admin on the project team from day 1 all the way to the end of the contract. The question then becomes which of the following would we be allowed to do: (1) If there is more than one task order outstanding during any given month, can we direct charge this person's wage x coefficient to the task orders (on a pro rata basis), and therefore get paid for that person? OR (2) Are we allowed to direct charge their wage x coefficient to a task order only if the person is 100% dedicated to that particular task order? (ie not splitting their time with other task orders within the same contract) OR (3) Will the client not allow us to direct charge this person at all since they're really part of the "project management" staff?
  5. Great questions, Joel. 1) It is an FFP, unit priced JOC for activities in the UPB. 2) I believe those. 3) No, we are still in the bidding phase. 4) Bonding is supposed to be included in the coefficient you submit in your bid. 5) This is for a future upcoming contract.
  6. Thank you. So it looks like we are CAS covered. So let me lay out an example and I'd appreciate it if you could opine please: The project is an IDIQ job order contract. We plan to staff 1 Planning Engineer for the whole contract, who will be there from Day 1 (even if no task orders have been issued yet). They shall do the planning work for all task orders that get issued during the contract. Now the Unit Price Book does have a rate for a Planning Engineer. The question therefore is, can I charge a Planning Engineer at the (UPB Rate x Coefficient) to the client in one of the task orders, or is it that because the engineer is working on simultaneous task orders (and not dedicated to a specific task order), then I am not allowed to charge for them?
  7. Thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate it. This is less of a question of how I treat these costs internally (for my own accounting purposes) and more of a question of what will the client's contracting officer allow us to charge them. It's important to know that because if I can charge them the monthly rate of a superintendent, for which there is a unit rate in the UPB, then it means when I'm estimating my bid price, I don't have to account for the cost of that person as overhead. As you could imagine, the larger your estimated overhead, the higher your bid price would be, and the lower your odds of winning the bid.
  8. For an IDIQ JOC where the UPB contains a list of roles and their rates (e.g. field superintendent, design engineer, etc), when calculating the overhead cost for the project, how do you distinguish between which staff personnel can be charged to the client and which can't? Asked the question, but client's response was not clear.
  9. Thank you Joel. I've reached out to Gordian and awaiting their response.
  10. Thank you for the FOIA idea. I've filed a request and hoping to get something. Re what I'm looking for, actually I'm just interested in the task catalog itself (some 800 pages), not the coefficient.
  11. "Offerors are required to submit proof of their ability to obtain surety for performance and payment bonds for orders issued under the awarded contract in the form of commercial surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, or other acceptable surety under FAR 52.228-15, which is included in this solicitation. The evidence shall prove that the offeror is able to provide bonds for a total of $X million U.S. Dollars coverage for a period of at least 300 calendar days. Performance and payment bonds must be supported by acceptable security as defined in FAR 28.201. A letter of commitment from an acceptable corporate surety as defined in FAR Subpart 28.2 will provide acceptable proof of the offeror’s ability to obtain the required coverage. Only a (U.S.) federally insured financial institution may confirm the offeror’s ability to obtain an ILC. The guidance below should assist the Contractor is determining what it must submit as proof: The evidence of ability to obtain adequate surety must come from an entity that would be acceptable as the surety during contract performance. Accordingly, a letter from a bank that is not (U.S.) federally insured would not be adequate proof of ability to obtain surety without an accompanying letter from a federally insured financial institution that would confirm an ILC issued by the bank that is not federally insured."
  12. We're looking at an RFP for USACE work outside the US and the RFP asks for a letter confirming bonding capacity from a US federally insured bank. Our local banks are willing to provide such letter, but if USACE only accepts letters from US-federally insured banks and we don't have prior relationships with US banks, what can we do?
  13. I'm bidding on an IDIQ JOC and would love some recommendations on the size of project team/staff suitable, the roles, their composition, and their org chart that would be deemed acceptable to the client. Haven't worked with the client before, so don't really know being on the outside. Would appreciate any examples or ideas. Thank you.
  14. Is there anyway of digging up a historical construction task catalog that contains unit prices for various line items? The one I'm looking for is like a 2012-13 version and I know that it was developed by the Gordion Group. Google search yields nothing. Any ideas? Would Gordion provide it if I reached out to them, you think? Thank you
×
×
  • Create New...