Don Mansfield

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Don Mansfield

  • Rank
    Platinum Member
  • Birthday 11/04/1972

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    San Diego, CA

Recent Profile Visitors

65,070 profile views
  1. No, that's not correct. Military standards are commercial standards for some items. For example, MIL-PRF-23699F-STD is a standard for gas turbine lubricant that is required in some commercial aircraft (see also The next time you take a commercial flight, take a close look at the wing. You may see small signs saying "Use MIL-STD-XXX Lubricant Only" or something similar.
  2. jonmjohnson, I once tried a software program called Virtual Thread that analyzes writing for readability. I entered the text for the provision at FAR 52.215-1 and it identified ( c )(3)(iv) as the least readable paragraph: I count 75 words and one sentence.
  3. Just wondering--what's the harm in giving the COs the pricing information they want?
  4. Fake news or just alternative facts?
  5. Deaner, Have you concluded that it doesn't make sense to use a responsibility-type factor to determine technical acceptability when using LPTA?
  6. joel, It's certainly not beneath me to start a thread that is a set-up, but this is not one of those instances. The OP did not say that he was in DoD, so I'm only paying attention to what the FAR says.
  7. I don't think so, but I'm hesitant to interpret a contract without reading it. You may have a case. Have you read this?
  8. I didn't know that. I haven't had any current DCAA auditors in my classes, but I have had some former auditors.
  9. Todd, I'm not telling you anything. You asserted that FAR subpart 1.6 prohibited a certain type of delegation and asking for proof because I don't see it. If the FAR does not expressly prohibit a CO from delegating their authority to sign contracts of an amount within their authority, then why should we think it's prohibited?
  10. By negotiating such a term in your subcontract?
  11. Todd, I get that the appointing authority is the one who can appoint someone a contracting officer on a SF 1402. However, all authorities in the FAR are delegable unless specifically stated otherwise (FAR 1.108(b)). So, if the FAR grants the contracting officer the authority to do something and is silent on whether the authority is delegable, why couldn't they delegate that authority? Do you think the delegate would also have to be appointed on a SF 1402?
  12. Formation of Government Contracts, Third Edition, describes one such reason in chapter 6, section IX (Sole Source Procurements) on p. 918:
  13. Why do you think there's a minimum each year?
  14. Ok, but where does it say what the CO can or cannot delegate?