Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

199 profile views
  1. O, but i once worked for an agency that discouraged taking advantage of a Ktrs discounts because the agency financial software would make you do a "modification" and it was more painful to do the "adjustment" than to pay the 1%. I don't know if you work for such an agency but bottom line is yes you can accept a discount whether there is a clause or not that says you can or can't accept.
  2. Yes you can accept a discount. It’s almost always beneficial to accept price/payment terms that are more favorable to the government if they come to light after a proposal or signed contract. Invoices for things that say 2/10 n 30 (pronounced two ten net thirty) is supposed to incentive a business (or government) to pay earlier than a due date. It’s generally in your best interest to pay earlier to get the discount, but if cash flow is a problem it may not be.
  3. I think that's it's own thread. Think of Amtrak, deficits or trillion $ debt. Boeing is pretty creative with their accounting but no business could survive a Government model. I'm off topic and dipping out before a scolding endures. Be @ canyon beach. Happy Tuesday!
  4. If you're asking for yes or no, then my opinion would be yes for both. With the exception of miniscule areas that you could argue over until blue in the face that in reality have little impact moving agency missions forward, complicated yes if you've never had exposure. I think sometimes people forget how hard it can be in the beginning. Complex, yes. Consider most agencies follow the FAR, agency supplements (2 different ones for the VA until a year or two ago), Supplements called Agency name Acquisition Manual, various acquisition policy memorandums (usually more than one type such as acquisition procedural manual, policy dashes, information letters, etc.), GAO decisions, other agency regulations such as the SBAs 13 CFR, DOT programs at 23 USC, VA at 38 USC, and many more that you have to put all together to ensure you legally follow all the rules depending on where you work. Does Bonneville Power Administration, Tennessee Valley Authority, the FAA, Architect of the Capital or any other agency that doesn't follow the FAR have the types of issues you think reform might solve or why reforms have failed? I apologize if you were only wanting a yes or no answer as I gave you a word dump.
  5. I suppose the part i'm confused about is if the procurement was protested to the SBA and GAO based on challenging the business size of the contractor who got the award, and the SBA denied that challenge, and assuming GAO will tell you they don't have jurisdiction over deciding on small business challenges, then what corrective action is the agency taking and why?
  6. Admittedly I don’t fully understand every aspect of your situation. It seems you were all sketched out the Government was doing something improper when you received a T4C notice a year ago, but actually they may have just been correcting an error made in their initial evaluation. I don’t feel I have the whole story, or I don’t understand why the agency did what they did. You said there was a protest to the SBA last year. Those protests don’t take a year, they generally take less than a month. I suppose an appeal could take longer but not a year from my experience. You would normally stay the award given a protest, so I understand your stop work order. If the contractor protests a size standard issue to the GAO, normally, GAO will just tell you they don’t have jurisdiction to decide on the matter. Of course I haven’t seen the protest. There’s generally nothing wrong awarding bridge contracts. would you expect an agency to go without a service or thing they need just because someone whines about it? Sure DOD gave up on Jedi, Homeland security and lots of other agencies have gave up, but I assume we’re not talking about a multibillion dollar effort here. Give the CO the benefit of the doubt that they are working the procurement in a good faith effort and will let you know what you need to know when you need to know it. That’s my red eyed, tired, Monday morning proceeded by preseason football weekend unsupported amateur thought.
  7. Did you look at FAR Part 19? To my knowledge the answer to you question is not in the FAR. Sometimes you need to look at other regulations to find acquisition answers. Do you know the regulations of the SBAs world? Have you looked at Title 13 of the CFR? How about 13 CFR § 121.404? Could be yes could be no.
  8. Maybe not a PMP but I could think of a few reasons; however, since you're asking I'm assuming you are requiring certain certifications and nobody knows why. Did you ask whoever wanted it in the solicitation, or the CO if you're industry?
  9. Thank Bob. Wonder why green globes wasn't touched on. been a while since I've been involved with vertical construction, but I remember at the time green globes was preferred to LEED. Maybe the thought has changed, I don't know.
  10. Yeah what you describe is probably the gist of how it's allowable. I think the ordering procedures in the contracts i've seen need a little creative writing to make it clear we would follow the framework of 36.6 and give fair opportunity. JJ, if you were going down a path that leads to a differing opinion feel free to continue. If not I appreciate everyone's input on this topic. I don't have anything further to add but if anyone has other input I'll continue to participate.
  11. I grew up as an enlisted soldier in the Army and grew accustomed to using derogatory words, a trait I've found to be difficult to ditch and not entirely acceptable in an office environment. I took a class called Crucial Conversations and they tell you to use words like unwise or ill-advised instead of brainless or laughable and precede statements with phrases like "in my opinion" which you did, so in my opinion you're post isn't offensive in my eyes.
  12. the IDIQ would allow for labor hour and fixed-price task orders. for discussion assume task orders would be for a fixed-price final deliverable.
  13. This is what I had concluded before my post, that you must still use a qualifications based selection when placing orders for A/E services against MATOCs. Here's what prompted my question - I've been a CO for about 10 years and have worked in three different civilian agencies. From what i've seen all three of those offices had established MATOCs for construction Design services and selecting firms at the task order level is not done as a qualifications based selection IAW the framework of 36.6. What i've actually been seeing is the CO, with the assistance of an engineer on the Governments side, would determine who would be the most qualified for a specific project based on what they personally knew or what was submitted with the request for qualifications before the award of the IDIQs, and then go directly to a single A/E firm for a price proposal. So if you can't use initial SF330s at the time of IDIQ award at the task order level to determine who is the most qualified, and write ordering procedures to state that's how fair opportunity will be provided then I can't figure out how the practice is allowable as the idea of getting 3 firms, holding interviews, etc. isn't happening from what i've seen.
  • Create New...