Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Boof

  1. This might seem a strange question but should our purchase orders, delivery orders and contracts for services contain a Freight on Board (FOB) designation on the documents? The issue came up because of our contract writing system defaulting to "destination" on services. They were trying to match up the contract system and the finance systems and wanted to know all the correct standard delivery terms. I gave them FAR 47.303 to list all the possible combinations. Someone suggested creating a new one - "Service Contract Only - No FOB terms" . This is not a FAR definition. Would we have to have a FAR deviation to add it to our writing system? Should we have a FOB for services? What does other agency contract writing systems put in the FOB block when it is services? By the way, we use Momentum Acquisitions as the writing system.
  2. For Department of State we have CORs and GTMs. They both have the same training requirements for the same level of COR duties (FAC COR I, II, or III). The GTM is intended to designate that they work for the COR and not directly for the KO. The KO delegates some of the COR duties to the GTM which could hold a lower COR level depending on duties assigned. Many times the COR will be in the program office in Washington while having GTMs at sites around thee world. The Bureaus sometimes insist we appoint an "Alternate COR" which is not in our DOSAR. This person is usually someone who works in the office of the COR who fills all the same duties when the COR is TDY or on leave. We have a lot of long overseas TDYS. Since the training and experience is met, we usually don't argue and just appoint the Alternate. Our big problem with CORs is not their meeting training requirements but experience requirements. The Government is becoming a revolving door and Bureaus can't find personnel with contracts experience and many do not have technical experience either. With contractors filling our technical positions, the FTEs are sometimes managers from Foreign Service or other career fields and do not know what to look for in performance. We just appoint the best available Government Employee offered by the program office and they can get the experience on the job.
  3. On-Site Contractor Supervision

    I would say that depends on the security requirements of your Agency or building.
  4. CPARS comments

    If the Government is serious about streamlining and saving the man hours they are taking away from us in downsizing then they need to scrap the whole past performance system. The CO would only report performance that is substandard after proving the contractor was given a chance to improve. I say this because your large contractors have both greatly sucessful contracts and some failures. Sometimes the failure is only due to picking a poor project manager without good intercommunication skills. When you are on a source selection board you read both good and bad reports on that contractor and it does you little good. It is unrealistic to expect a contractor who is graded on profitability to increase their costs to give the Government something above what they contracted for (satisfactory). All the bad reports would flow to a Government Wide Debarrment Official who would debar any contractor receiving a high percentage of poor performance reports compared to their total contract awards. All companies would be equal if they have no poor reports. My suggestion would save thousands of man hours in writing and processing CPAR reports, simplify source selections, and eliminate one of the largest protest issues.
  5. CPARS comments

    In my acquisitions office it is office policy that the reviewing official be the CO's Division Director.
  6. CPARS comments

    The CPAR system is set up to keep COs from being pressured into changing performance reports. Once the report goes to the contractor it cannot be withdrawn and changed. The Contractor makes thier comments and either requests review or not. I have seen the comments section of an outstanding report read like a multi page advertisment for the company. All the comments stay with the report. In the case of judicial action, the Department Point of Contact (DPOC) for CPARS can request the report be placed back in draft for rewrite but this is only done in extreme cases. If you go to the CPAR website you can find the CPAR guidebook that lays out the whole reporting system. I believe the guide is before a sign in so anyone can access it.
  7. Privatization

    Off the top of my head without any research, I always thought that oursourcing was what "privatizaiton" was all about. Contracting out which leaves the Government with some control over the work and outcome or just turning over a Government function to private industry by selling it or giving it away. Can't think of what we may have given away or sold though.
  8. The FAR Finance Team sent us this response concerning a revision being made to FAR 11.002. FAR Finance Team’s Response: The FAR should not instruct requiring activities (requiring activities must prepare...) but rather the contracting officer. Therefore, the text was changed to instruct the contracting officer rather than the requiring activity (the contracting officer shall obtain from the requiring activity...). I thought the FAR applied to all members of the Federal Government but at least to the members of the Acquisition team. FAR 1.102-4(e) states: (e) The FAR outlines procurement policies and procedures that are used by members of the Acquisition Team........... So how can they say the FAR should not instruct the requirments office on thier responsibility to prepare the requirements document. I just thought I would see what the WIFCON community thought about this. Maybe I am off base in my thinking.
  9. IDIQ Decision

    As my office assigns the 50 reqs that we just received this morning, I must chuckle. We have accepted over 500 orders since our cut off of Sept 15th. How can you stop the requests when the funds are not released until September. We just got Congressional Notice on about a billion $ Thursday night. Of course they were ready for award already and awaiting the funds but still there is a lot of work to finalize the award in the system. We plan to be here till midnight like every year.
  10. OK so I post my requirement to Alliant SB and if I do not get two acceptable proposals, I repost it to Alliant LB.
  11. 5 Year IDIQ Contract

    You better start running harder or you may get traded. You were my favorite player but you been slacking lately. Anyway, to your question. I cannot opine on all the reasons there might be something wrong with the contract but it probably has to do with the funds. I assume it is a labor hour contract since you mention annual labor rates. Funds are usually annual and cannot fund more than 365 days from obligation on severable T&M labor hour contracts. So they would not have been available for 5 years as you thought.
  12. Eliminate everything having to do with the service contract inventory reporting by contractors. Seems to just be a back door way of getting head counts that the Government can never give accurately. And guess what? They have never gotten accurate data from it either. FAR 4.17.
  13. And get away with it. And be chosen as Best in Class. They might as well not trained me.
  14. PP Neutral Rating

    If everyone is doing their jobs correctly the past performance information will be in PPIRS. The contractor cannot claim he has none. However, not everyone is getting all their reports into the system. My Agency is about 22%. Everryone says they have no time. Then on the evaluation side, only "relevent" past performance can be considered and their is plenty of protest cases over that. What if it for work in a different NAICS but there is 5 reports in PPIRS (each lower value) that are sat and below. Why should that not be "relevent". Between the CPAR system being too segregated in who can submit reports, password difficulties with the system, and too many protests over the PP evals, the whole system needs to be revamped.
  15. NITAAC vs GSA

    NASA SEWP is where the majority of the COs in my agency go for anything IT related. We are just not that familiar with NITAAC.
  16. How to communicate and collaborate with thier clients. Beiing a team player when appropriate, taking total charge when necessary and knowing when to do each. All the training in the world will not solve someone being emotionally immature and unable to function on a team. Or someone so introverted they block thier cube entrance with a filing cabinet and never leave thier cube.
  17. H - clause vs FAR/DFAR

    Now we get information that Gabriel should have provided in the first post. Kicked down the road for 4 years and $10B involved? Plus I read about a BOA (what has that to do with the contract). Sounds like the legal departments need to hash this out. Or do as Don suggested and issue a final decision before the legal teams fight it out. $10B would make me do everything in my power to push Section H at the Governement.
  18. TEP = Sum of Labor Rates

    Remember that GSA has pioneered awarding IDIQ contracts with no pricing at all for which there will be competition at the task order level. The GAO overruled the protest against that method. So it is not so clear cut anymore.
  19. All, I am not very good at trying to research historical information on why actions are the way they are. The subject tax law allows us to renegotiate price for unexpected business taxes charged the contractor but does not allow us to increase the price for social security and other employement taxes levied on the workers. Why not? Could someone with good research skills see if the Federal Register or FAR council explained why this is. If they are working in one of our conflict zones and the host country suddenly pulls 15% of thier pay, they want to be made whole again or they threaten to head for the next plane out. They are there to make money, not for the scenery. So why can we make a contractor whole but not his employees?
  20. These are all overseas contracts so SCA does not apply.
  21. Is the CPCM worth getting?

    I think I learned a lot preparing for the test. The exam was more difficult than any I took in college so I was very proud to pass it. My management was impressed as many are NCMA members and that sure did not hurt my rise from intern to Division Director in minimal time. I kind of like seeing the CPCM in my signature block too.
  22. Our form (DS-1910 automated) has to go to the small business office even if it is a 100% set aside for small business. They get to help us decide which socio-economic category we should be using. Our published pecking order for this year (several years) is HUBZONE, SDVOSB, and WOSB. So the COs must prove with market research that each in turn cannot meet the need. If none can, then you can go regular small business or large business as justified. The form is very similar to the DoD form in content but not looks of course. It is passed electronically in our MyData system.
  23. Department of State uses the DS-1910 as our required form. It was recently automated as more of a database than a form so i have no idea how to attach it now.
  24. Estimated Delivery Order

    He needs 100 per year but can only store 10. Why not award a delivery order for 100 widgets and on the delivery order state they are to be delivered ten at a time upon receipt of an email from the program office POC/COR. The company invoices after each shipment. We have done that several times. Why would this be an issue?
  25. Contracting Officer Misconduct

    It depends on the Agency and how it is orgainized. In my agency, we have Branch Chiefs and Division Directors above the COs. Contractors can appeal to them and they do with some frequency. We also have an ombudsman assigned by clause to all IDIQ contracts to ensure fair opportunity. If the management thinks a contractor is being wronged, they will talk to the CO involved to try and improve the situation or if they believe the CO to be right they will explain to the contractor why we believe what we are doing is proper. All past performance reports through CPARS must go to the contractor for comment, and if they disagree with the report, they can refute the report and request a review. All our reviews are by a Division Director. We have reassigned contracts in some cases where it is obvious the CO is having personality conflicts with the contractor's representatives. I have seen the complaints about not being able to do anything about a particular CO but my immediate thought is "everyone has a supervisor somewhere". If all fails, file a breach of contract as stated earlier.