Jump to content

Don Mansfield

Members
  • Posts

    3,369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Mansfield

  1. Yes, the contract contains FAR 52.245-1. So you would abandon the four Government-furnished widgets? How would you go about meeting the need for the four remaining widgets? This is an academic exercise. There's no right answer. Only you know what you would do.
  2. 1. The contract does not define "repair". 2. The contract contains clauses prescribed for use in contracts for services--not supplies. No FAR 52.211-5 or FAR 52.211-16. 3. Contract is just for repair, not repair/replace. The Government gives the widgets to the contractor, the contractor repairs them and gives them back. 4. You can assume FFP. 5. No construction contract clauses. 6. No excusable delay.
  3. Here's a fun scenario that someone sent me. The Government has a fixed-price requirements contract for the repair of noncommercial widgets for a base year and four option years. The contracting officer issues a task order for the repair of 19 widgets. The contractor repairs and returns 15 of the 19 widgets. According to the contractor, they will not be able to repair the remaining four widgets by the delivery date. However, they have offered to provide new widgets instead, for the same price the Government would have paid for the repairs. Part 1: What would you do as the contracting officer, assuming the contractor is the OEM and a sole source J&A was executed for the original contract for repair services? Part 2: What would you do as the contracting officer, assuming the original contract for repair services was awarded competitively and that there was market competition for widgets? If you need more details, ask. No unwarranted assumptions. Have fun.
  4. Specifically regarding FAR 6.302-1, paragraph ( b ) states:
  5. I would think that it would be, but it's not listed in the current inventory of approved information collections for the FAR. The only part of FAR 52.216-7 that has an OMB Control Number is for the submission of an indirect cost rate proposal (9000-0069). The following all have OMB Control Numbers (meaning they are approved information collections): Requests for progress payments under FAR 52.232-13 through -16 (OMB Control Number 9000-0010) Requests for payments under FAR 52.232-1 through FAR 52.232-4, and FAR 52.232-6 through FAR 52.232-11 (OMB Control Number 9000-0070) Requests for advance payments under FAR 52.232-12 (OMB Control Number 9000-0073) I obtained all of my information from http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. I don't know why a request for reimbursement under FAR 52.216-7 would not require an OMB Control Number.
  6. I don't see why not. All sorts of requests for copies of this or that in FAR clauses are collections of information. For example, FAR 52.247-2 requires the contractor to provide a copy of an FHA authorization. That's a collection of information covered by OMB Control Number 9000-0053. FAR 52.215-20( a )(1) requires offerors to submit copies of documents to support a request for an exemption for cost or pricing data. That's covered under OMB Control Number 9000-0013. Requiring a contractor to send a letter (or e-mail) notifying the CO of bankruptcy under FAR 52.242-13 is a collection of information covered under OMB Control Number 9000-0108. Look at the list of approved information collections at FAR 1.106 and you'll see that very minor things are technically "collections of information."
  7. Cajuncharlie, I assume some contracting office is using that clause as a matter of practice. If so, what authorizes the Government to collect the information described? Which of the OMB Control Numbers listed at FAR 1.106 applies? Also, the clause would arguably impose a significant administrative burden on contractors. Was it published for comment in the Federal Register in accordance with FAR 1.301( b )?
  8. Sure, it could be challenged. However, I don't know that such a challenge would be successful. The requirement for there to be a reasonable expectation of receiving offers of products of different small business concerns is as old as the FAR. (It used to apply to all acquisitions until the implementation of FASA, which removed that requirement for acquisitions described in FAR 19.502-2(a). See 60 FR 34741.) Recently, in Matter of: Latvian Connection General Trading and Construction LLC, B-408633, September 18, 2013, the GAO did not take exception to the FAR Council's restrictive implementation of the Small Business Act--which it only applies to acquisitions inside the United States and outlying areas (See FAR 19.000( b )). From the decision: Similar to their silence regarding their geographic applicability, neither the Small Business Act nor the SBA regulations specifically address whether there needs to be a reasonable expectation of receiving offers of products from different small business concerns. As such, I would not be surprised if the GAO gave deference to the FAR Council's interpretation in a protest based on the inconsistency between FAR 19.502-2( b ) and the SBA regulations.
  9. govt2310, Can the incentive be monetary? What type of incentive do you think FAR 16.202-1 is referring to?
  10. That sentence only applies to acquisitions where the nonmanufacturer rule has been waived or the exception described applies ("In both of these cases..."). Here's the paragraph in its entirety: If the nonmanufacturer rule has been waived or the acquisition will not exceed $25,000, then there must be a reasonable expectation of receiving offers from at least two SB concerns offering the products of different concerns. In my scenario, the nonmanufacturer rule has not been waived and the acquisition exceeds $25,000.
  11. FAR 19.502-2( b ) states: FAR 19.502-2( a ) states: Note that, unlike FAR 19.502-2( b ), FAR 19.502-2( a ) does not require that there be a reasonable expectation of receiving offers of products of different small business concerns--just offers from two or more small business concerns. Question: Assume you have a requirement for a brand name item manufactured by a small business concern valued at $100,000. You expect to receive offers from two or more responsible small business concerns offering the brand name item. You will use SAP (so FAR part 6 doesn't apply). Is the acquisition automatically reserved for small business?
  12. B.A., Spanish, Vanderbilt University, 1994.
  13. 1. What is your all time favorite book? One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. 2. What is your all time favorite song or album? Loser by Beck 3. What is your all time favorite movie? The Godfather 4. Who is your favorite poet? Pablo Neruda
  14. The DCAA Guidance is wrong. According to FAR 1.104, the FAR applies to "acquisitions" as defined at FAR 2.101. According to the definition of "acquisition", an acquisition is made by the Federal Government. When a contractor enters into a contract with the Federal Government, they may agree to comply with certain regulations cited in the contract's terms and conditions. However, to say that the FAR is an acquisition regulation for contractors is just plain wrong. See "What is the relationship between the FAR and a federal contract?" on p. 23 of this report.
  15. The Wifcon calendar says that today is Bob's birthday. For those of you who don't know, Bob is the webmaster for Wifcon. This site was his creation and he maintains it all by himself. Please join me in wishing Bob a happy birthday.
  16. For EDWOSB set-asides, the limitation on subcontracting is stated at FAR 52.219-29( d ). FAR 52.219-14 is not for use in solicitations set aside for EDWOSBs.
  17. jb208, The issue is whether you must have options in an IDIQ contract with an ordering period that exceeds one year. There's no need to classify such a contract as a multiple-year contract to make your case. If others want to argue that multiple-year contracts must have options, then I would say fine--then this contract doesn't meet your definition of multiple-year contract. However, that would be irrelevant as to whether an IDIQ contract with an ordering period exceeding one year must contain options. There is no requirement in the FAR or VAAR that IDIQ contracts contain options if the ordering period is to exceed one year. As you have already found, the FAR even advises against including options in an IDIQ contract. Here's an excerpt from an old Nash & Cibinic article on the subject (see IDIQ Contracts and Options: Varied Guaranteed Minimums, 16 NC&R 9, September 2002):
  18. Do you mind if I ask which agency did this?
  19. odessa, Which exception to full and open competition did you use?
  20. For what purpose are you classifying the maintenance as a supply or a service?
  21. I've never heard of any initiative to include services in the definition of "nondevelopmental item."
  22. Here's DFARS 222.7000( b ) in its entirety: ​ I think you are misinterpreting (2). The Secretary of Labor determines the national average rate of unemployment. They do not determine whether the unemployment rate in a noncontiguous state exceeds the national average rate of unemployment. BTW, unemployment rate for Guam.
×
×
  • Create New...