Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Don Mansfield

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Mansfield

  1. Park the money

    This is what I would write: "I can only record an obligation for the amount of the obligation created by the task order. If you want to commit the funds that were not obligated, then you should speak to the financial management folks because I don't have that authority. If you need any help, let me know." I prefer to assume the engineer is just ignorant of the rules, not that they are knowingly intent on doing something illegal. Help them solve their problem.
  2. I think the CO forwards the protest to the SBA and stays out of it. It's not the CO's call.
  3. Right. See also FAR 52.204-8( d ) or 52.212-3( b )(2).
  4. joel, The person I asked didn't see an inherent problem with target price = ceiling price, either.
  5. joel, Thanks for the second post. I was having trouble figuring out what your question was. So, there would be a target profit and a target cost stated in the contract. When added together, they would equal the ceiling price. There would be sharing under the target cost, but not over. In other words, the target cost is the PTA. I don't see an obvious problem with that. I'm going to ask someone who knows more than me about FPI(F) contracts.
  6. Buy American Act and Services

    At this point, why does it matter? He already has the contract and neither FAR 52.225-3 nor -5 apply to services--they apply to end products.
  7. Zag, FAR 22.603 should be read like this: The requirements in 22.602 apply to 1. contracts (including for this purpose, indefinite-delivery contracts, basic ordering agreements, and blanket purchase agreements) and 2. subcontracts under Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act Remember, under the 8(a) Program, the agency has a contract with the SBA. The SBA subcontracts to the 8(a) Participant. The requirements of FAR 22.602 apply to the subcontract between the SBA and the 8(a) Participant.
  8. Buy American Act and Services

    Actually, Bahamas is a designated country, so that would be ok. But your statement would be true with a nondesignated country.
  9. Buy American Act and Services

    FAR 52.225-5 requires the contractor to deliver U.S.-made or designated country end products. It does not require or prohibit the performance of services by a contractor established in any particular country or class of countries. Paragraph (b) states: FAR 25.403( c )(1) restricts the purchase of other than U.S. or designated country services, but subsequent to award no FAR or DFARS clause requires or prohibits the contractor from using sources from nondesignated countries to perform work.
  10. They protested a solicitation on August 1. I don't know the result, though. They've been banned from my inbox.
  11. Buy American Act and Services

    Neither the FAR nor DFARS contain any provisions or clauses that implement the TAA for services.
  12. Parts received after Task Order PoP end date

    Completion contracts don't necessarily require actual completion--they could just require a contractor's best efforts to achieve completion. The terms "completion" and "level-of-effort" are used to describe how the contract describes the scope of work. There's a good discussion of the distinction in the FAR as it relates to CPFF contracts at FAR 16.306( d ): In a cost-reimbursement contract, either form obligates the contractor to provide its "best efforts". This obligation is stated in either the Limitation of Funds or Limitation of Cost clause. See FAR 52.232-20( a ): Make sense?
  13. Parts received after Task Order PoP end date

    You meant "level-of-effort" not "best effort", right?
  14. Cost Monitoring Plans

    (1) Don't know of any provision or clause. Nothing would prevent the contractor from telling the Government "N/A". However, take a look at So, it looks like the plan would be to ding a business system if the ACO didn't like your lack of a strategy. Probably estimating system. (2) If the contractor had such information, I think it would be part of their estimating system, correct? If so, then I would go with DFARS 252.215-7002, Cost Estimating System Requirements.
  15. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    No. In my scenario, once costs get up to $3,437,500 the contract becomes a FFP contract for $3,250,000.
  16. PP Neutral Rating

    I don't think you'd have to be that explicit. The solicitation could just say that respondents who fail to follow the instructions herein will be evaluated unfavorably under "compliance with solicitation requirements".
  17. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    Did you read that case Vern posted?
  18. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    I assume your reference to FAR 16.403-1(a) was to "when final cost is more than target cost, application of the formula results in a final profit less than the target profit, or even a net loss." As far as cost allowability, one of the standards at FAR 31.201-2( a ) is "Terms of the contract". Why couldn't the parties enter into an advance agreement that would disallow a portion of costs by the amount of any negative profit? So the answer to the original poster's question--"PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?"--seems to be a big deal.
  19. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

  20. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    Yes, I think you understand.
  21. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    If the contractor incurs another dollar above $3,250,000, the Government pays $0.40 and the contractor's profit goes down $0.60. The total amount the Government pays is $3,175,000.40.
  22. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    Yes, that's wrong. If the contractor incurred $3,250,000 in cost, the Government would only pay $3,175,000. See my first calculation above. Cost sharing would continue up to $3,437,500. At that point and above, the Government would pay $3,250,000 (the ceiling price).
  23. PTA above ceiling price — how big a deal, really?

    I'm sorry, Vern. My example above disproves that assertion. In my example, the ceiling price is $3,250,000, but the PTA is $3,437,500. Your assertion is only true if profit will be >= $0 at the ceiling price.
  24. PP Neutral Rating

    I disagree that OMB has interpreted the law as not applying to RFPs. The PRA regulations expressly apply to RFPs. 5 CFR 1320.3( c )(1) states: I also disagree that agencies would necessarily have to get OMB approval for each individual RFP. An RFP contains dozens of information collections--some approved by OMB, some may not be. If an RFP contained an information collection that was not approved by OMB, then approval would be required for that specific information collection.