Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Dominicke Ybarra

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Dominicke Ybarra

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. DoD 7000.14-R Financial Management Regulation Volume 11B, Chapter 1 paragraph 010204 covers the scenario . It is what is what happens when a DWCF activity’s operations are funded by the "reimbursements" it receives from its customers for the goods or services provided.
  2. If you wanted to dive deeply into the matter I suggested reading DoD 7000.14-R Financial Management Regulation Volume 11B "REIMBURSABLE OPERATIONS POLICY - WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS (WCF)", Chapter 1 (August 2019 version)(https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/Volume_11b.pdf) In particular paragraphs 010204 & 010210, I had to read them several times but I think the answer to your questions lies within them.
  3. I left the Federal Government as a Warranted Contracting Officer 4 months ago (after 9 years of service). The title of my current position is "Contract Manager". I started my search for other jobs outside the federal government by searching the typical job posting sites for key words such as "FAR" & "DFARS". Using those terms I found a plethora of jobs seeking the exact qualifications I brought to the table. Within a month of searching and applying I had four interviews and three offers. Also, I used a resume writing service to produce my resume...cost about $250 but worth every penny. Good Luck, this is a great job market and companies are competing for the right people. Also, do not forget to ask for your exit letter from the Government Attorney's. You should be well aware of the one year, two year, and lifetime bands placed on Contracting Officer's. That last part might narrow "who" you can work for so make sure you get that started soon.
  4. Point of clarification: 1) Does this scenario assume the incumbent is awarded some type of "Bridge" contract for continuity while the protest is being sorted out? 2) if 1) is true, then would that "Bridge" contract be awarded based on an approved J&A, citing 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302-1 -- Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements? Or, possibly 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(2) as implemented by FAR 6.302-2 Unusual and Compelling Urgency? Assuming Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements... I have long wondered how only one source could possibly be true? Wouldn't there be two sources...(1) the Incumbent and (2) the successful awardee of the contract under protest? On that point why would the Government have to award the "Bridge" contract to the incumbent? Couldn't the Government as easy conclude only the successful awardee of the contract under protest as the Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements? Surely the GAO automatic stay of performance doesn't extend to the "Bridge" contract. If it did we wouldn't have so many of those "Bridge" contracts awarded. Without the almost guaranteed "Bridge" contract the incumbent incentive to protest would be erased. Basically, there is no need for a new clause. Only a shift in thinking of how to approach the problem of incumbent incentive to protest. If the incumbent knows they will get a "Bridge" contract for protesting then they will protest. If the Government removed the incentive of awarding "Bridge" contracts to incumbents and instead awarded the "Bridge" contracts to the successful awardee of the contract under protest, then the incentive will have been successfully removed. Perhaps a step to far is stop awarding "Bridge" contracts altogether. However, it would be just as effective. Finally, I have seen this scenario in the real world and successfully deployed this tactic. It worked for our team once upon a time. The result was the incumbent dropped the protest and the rest is history as they say.
  5. Finally registered and posted.

  6. I came across this article the other day. It is written for a contract professional audience. This article appears to be peer reviewed, unbiased, and well documented in the form of citations it provides in asserting its premise: “Other Transactions Are Contracts with the Government”. Originally published by Public Contract Law Journal Author: Nathaniel Castellano http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/839220/Government+Contracts+Procurement+PPP/Other+Transactions+Are+Government+Contracts+And+Why+It+Matters Full Article: https://www.arnoldporter.com/-/media/files/perspectives/publications/2019/08/other-transactions-are-government-contracts-and-wh.pdf
  • Create New...