Don Mansfield

Winner!

Not all federal contracts--all DoD contracts. DoD issues memos that direct contracting officers to comply with the law while the regulations catch up. This is one such memo.

Perhaps

Thanks, Matthew. Now when are you going to do my new Problem of the Day?

Workaholics compared to the Dutch.

How readable should a Federal solicitation be?

Assume that you are pricing a firm-fixed-price contract using cost analysis. The prospective contractor has included a contingency of $100,000 in its cost proposal of the type described at FAR 31.205-7(c)(1): There is a 90% chance that this contingency will occur. If it occurs, there's a 100% chance it will cost $100,000. The prospective contractor can take Precaution A, which will cost $50,000. If the contingency occurs, Precaution A would reduce the chance of the contingency costing $100,000 to 30% (there would be a 70% chance the contingency would cost $0). The prospective contractor can take Precaution B, which will cost $75,000. If the contingency occurs, Precaution B would reduce the chance of the contingency costing $100,000 to 10% (there would be a 90% chance the contingency would cost $0). The prospective contractor is free to take Precaution A, Precaution B, or do nothing. What amount for this contingency would you allow in the contract price? You may ask for more facts if you'd like or ask to make an assumption. Do not fight the hypothetical. Enjoy.

I know of a pretty big agency that spends a lot of money training employees to know and do things that they don't need to know or do in order to do their jobs.

I don't know. Here's another resource, though: https://www2.oge.gov/web/oge.nsf/Post-Government Employment

Kaiser, The person you want to ask is your agency ethics official. You will want a written opinion. See FAR 3.104-6 for what you should do.

If it's a cost-reimbursement contract, then the contract would have to include the clause at FAR 52.228-7, Insurance-Liability to Third Persons. That clause requires the contractor to maintain certain types of insurance, unless they have an approved self-insurance program. If Mayhem struck when a contractor employee was getting a ride from the Government, resulting in injury or death, a worker's compensation claim could be made by the employee against the employer. The costs of insurance and indemnification are generally allowable (see FAR 31.205-19). If the work is overseas, see FAR 28.305.

Would contractor employees merely be passengers? Or are they operating the aircraft/motor vehicles? Are the aircraft/vehicles in the possession of the contractor?

here_2_help's #8, "Other Matters" seems like a good place to put other relevant disclosures.

You're welcome, ji. See also 7-2124 of the DCAA CAM (October 2014):

Yes. The costs were allowable as fringe benefits if certain conditions were met: https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/2005-1405-DPAP.pdf However, joel is correct that the contractor only gets paid for hours worked, at least under a Government T&M contract. We don't know the exact payment terms in the subcontract, but if they are essentially the same as the FAR clauses for T&M payment then the contractor would not be entitled to payment for hours not worked. Presumably, these costs would be recovered through the hourly rate, which should include indirect expenses.

Shawn, Will you be seeking reimbursement from the Government for the subcontract costs?

Hypothetically, if there were such a term in the prime contract (i.e., the Government won't pay subcontractor profit), the Government could disallow the amount of subcontractor profit in its dealings with the prime contractor, regardless of whether the prime flowed the clause down to the sub. However, I don't think that would be a reasonable interpretation of "all reasonable, allowable and allocable costs resulting from the Contractor's implementation of the HWP based on such Government direction."

1. I think that's reasonable. 2. Makes sense to me.

Ok, so the clause only provides for the reimbursement of costs and the Government is willing to reimburse your costs. But you are saying the Government directed you to do work that was not contained in the Heavy Weather Plan, correct? And you seek a price adjustment for that work, correct? Your argument is that the Government constructively changed the agreed-to Heavy Weather Plan? If that's the case, then I think you should seek an equitable adjustment under the Changes clause.

There is no categorical distinction between "university research" and "commercial item". If the research to be performed by a university meets the definition of "commercial item", it's a commercial item. I would expect some research done by universities to meet the definition of "commercial item".

That model actually complies with the Instructions in FAR Table 15-2. The instructions state: The exhibits reference specific files where the cost or pricing data are contained and can be furnished "immediately upon request".

Sounds reasonable to me. ji seems to have dealt with this specific issue before. Whatever he did was probably thoughtful and efficient.

Is there a clause that entitles the contractor to an adjustment when directed to execute a heavy weather plan? If so, what does that clause say?

Take a look at the "Model Proposal" on p. 27 of this: https://www.dcaa.mil/Content/Documents/DCAAM_7641.90.pdf

The exception is actually for "publications", which the GAO has interpreted as: See https://www.gao.gov/products/403305#mt=e-report Wouldn't it be sensible to interpret "publication" to accommodate a set of instructions or programs instructing a computer to do specific tasks (i.e., "software")?