Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Don Mansfield

Members
  • Content Count

    2,442
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Don Mansfield

  • Rank
    Contributing Member
  • Birthday 11/04/1972

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    San Diego, CA

Recent Profile Visitors

73,480 profile views
  1. Better, but you are still requesting information with little predictive value. Unless you are asking for promises, an offeror's statements about the future will be written to show them in the best possible light--as opposed to providing the most accurate depiction of the future. This is improved crawling.
  2. Yes, but the contracting officer doesn't have Santa Claus authority--that resides in the agency head. 🎅 COs are just elves. 🧝‍♂️🧝‍♂️🧝‍♂️
  3. Terms can be renegotiated under Government contracts, too. Remember when DoD gave a generous price increase and advance payments to the Anthrax vaccine contractor that was failing?
  4. joel, No offense intended. I have no problem with what you wrote. I think ji is responding as a contracting officer should when being asked for a price increase on a FFP contract. The first question should be "what entitles the contractor to a price increase?" Under the standard FAR clauses, severe weather alone does not. End of story. If the contractor wants a price increase, they need to present a different argument. Cold hard logic.
  5. Did you read FAR 31.205-7? Specifically, paragraph (c)?
  6. One improvement: the rule would not apply to "nontraditional defense contractors (NDCs)". NDCs would be defined as contractors who are not currently performing or who have not performed within the last year a CAS-covered contract or subcontract.
  7. Clause Logic Service relies on human interaction with the program. I want something that can scan an acquisition plan and spit out all required FAR/DFARS provisions and clauses. Here's a tool that scans contracts and spits out a list of required flowdowns: https://farclause.com/ That's what I'm talking about. We're probably not that far from a tool that scans RFPs and can spit out a winning "technical/management approach".
  8. @MBrown, I agree. Contracting officers shouldn't be including clauses in contracts that are clearly inapplicable and claiming they are "self-deleting". However, some clauses are written to become inapplicable if certain conditions are met or an exception applies (what some call "self-deleting"). For example, FAR 52.219-9(a): "This clause does not apply to small business concerns." FAR 52.222-20 preamble: "If this contract is for the manufacture or furnishing of materials, supplies, articles or equipment in an amount that exceeds or may exceed $15,000, and is subject to 41 U.S.C. chapter 65, the following terms and conditions apply:" FAR 52.230-2(a): "Unless the contract is exempt under 48 CFR 9903.201-1 and 9903.201-2, the provisions of 48 CFR Part 9903 are incorporated herein by reference and the Contractor, in connection with this contract, shall-" FAR 52.230-6(l)(1) actually uses the term: "do not use self-deleting clauses". Self-deleting clauses are a thing.
  9. I think this is a thoughtful question for a beginner. First, the rule that you would have to consider is whether incorporating a clause that isn't required would be a deviation from the FAR. See FAR subpart 1.4 for coverage of deviations. Second, I think that including as many clauses as possible so that you don't have to do a modification in the future is a good example of local optimization at the expense of system optimization. Those clauses impose administrative burdens on contractors and increase costs. These costs are passed on to the Government in the form of higher prices/costs. I think it would be a good idea to have a shopping cart feature on screens where contract specialists are selecting clauses, so they can see the increased costs as they select. Third, since you're a beginner, I'm going to assume that you're young and more tech savvy than me. Get together with some of your friends and develop a computer algorithm for selecting contract clauses. Humans are not good at selecting clauses--we'd be better off with robots.
  10. What do you mean by "self-deleting"? Do you mean a clause that is included in a contract that may turn out to be inapplicable?
  11. You didn't waste my time. I never noticed the language at FAR 17.204(d).
  12. I don't think this is true if the solicitation contained the unaltered text of FAR 52.212-1, as this provision includes the standard late offer rule. That's why I advocate tailoring the provision for SAP so the CO can accept late quotations if they are received before award is made and doing so would not unduly delay the acquisition.
  13. This is neither factual nor a rational interpretation of FAR 15.506. The claim: is laughable pseudo intellectualism.
×
×
  • Create New...