Jump to content

FAR Fetched

Members
  • Posts

    191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FAR Fetched

  1. Well, sounds like you've learned the lesson of being "dead right". Good luck.
  2. Are you asking why the specs take precedence or why it's common practice in the constuction industry? I'm not sure I know the answer to either, it's just a "that's the way it's always been" answer (which I hate giving anyone btw). Also, in my experience, I seen more screwed up drawings than specs (but I'm sure that adds nothing to the "why" question).
  3. Not at all. In fact, the only time the "fixed labor rate" came up, as the CO described, was the pricing back up they required during the proposal phase which was never incorporated into the contract. They had an IGCE that estimated the service price per month at $75; we were the lowest bidder at $100 per month. They asked us to support our estimate and we did (estimated X number of oil changes per month * estimated time to change oil * cost of labor to change oil = monthly FFP).
  4. Vern This was basically the way the CO viewed it. The problem was it was not what was clearly stated in the RFP, my proposal and the contract I signed. The hours were the "bases" for my FFP. The Gov wanted a "monthly service". For this service, I bid 1 CLIN at 12 Units (months) for say $X a Unit to deliver a specific level of service each month (not hours). To put the Service in perspective and to protect the innocent: The Gov wanted to pay 1 price per month to cover unlimited oil changes in all their GCars. The Contractor estimates based on the number of cars that it will use on average about 50 man-hours a month. My proposal is for 12 Units for $100 each Unit; the 50 hours a month is my bases for my FFP (not my proposed price). Award Doc: CLIN 001 Units 12 -- Price per Unit $100 -- CLIN Total $1200 The Gov after award decided that if they had a lot of oil changes in a month they would only pay $100 Monthly Unit Price. If they had very few oil changes in a given month, the Gov would decide how many hours we actually worked and only pay "actual hours". Hence my tirade.
  5. Also - it should be noted that I'm usually not this big of a jerk.
  6. I love when agencies make up their own definition of FFP. Be prepared to take a hard stance or get runover. I'll share an email chain that led to me going over the CO's head, to the Director who agreed with me and moved my contract to another CO. I haven't had a problem getting paid since and we've won follow-on work after. It should also be noted that this CO refused to discuss anything on the phone or in person and wanted everything in writting. This was several years ago but still my favorite: (the emails go top to bottom) (First email) To: FAR Fetched (Contractor) FAR Fetched, I am rejecting your invoice. I can only document the labor category providing 35 hours of service in (month) based on the sign-in log. Your invoice indicates 50 hours. Please update the invoice and resubmit. - CO To: CO This is FFP Contract. We bid and were awarded FFP Contract to provide (services) for (dollar amount) a month. Please explain why we’re being required to provide backup that is typically associated with a T&M or Labor Hour contract. -FAR Fetched To: FAR Fetched The contract was written as a fixed rate labor hours (600) with a fixed rate labor rate of $X which (Company) quoted would take to manage the program for Firm Fixed Price of $X. Therefore you can only bill for direct materials and the hourly rate that you actually worked against the contract, which according to (COTR), your personnel only logged in 35 hours during the month of April. -CO To: CO What you’re describing is a T&M contract. -FAR Fetched To: FAR Fetched No, it’s a "Firm Fixed Price Labor Hour contract". Therefore if you exceed the hours authorized per your proposal due to a change in the requirement by the Government you are required to request additional hours. However if the Government doesn’t change the requirement and Company exceeds the hours proposed then Company is responsible to continue to perform the effort at its own cost. I recommend that we renegotiate CLIN X to change the requirement to a FFP – LOE, this will alleviate any invoicing issues with regard to the number of hours being invoiced. -CO To: CO What is your definition of a ‘Labor Hour contract’? The FAR defines Labor Hour contract under Subpart 16.6 Time-and-Materials, Labor-Hour, and Letter Contracts but you’re still calling it Fixed Price. “Fixed hourly rates”, as you mentioned in your email below are also defined in 16.6 Time-and-Materials, Labor-Hour, and Letter Contracts. Subpart 16.2—Fixed-Price Contracts, states that ( “Time-and-materials contracts and labor-hour contracts are not fixed-price contracts” This is the problem we’re having; we’re not operating by the same set of guidelines. I’m willing to renegotiate the contract to Labor Hour contract but this will impact our originally proposed price because Company bid and was awarded a Firm Fixed Price contract. Company can perform any type of contract but we have to have a consistent understanding of the contract’s type. -FAR Fetched To: FAR Fetched Refer to FAR 12.207 (a) which states that Labor Hour contracts shall use firm-fixed price contracts which is why I am referring to fixed rates. -CO (Last email) To: CO FAR 12.207(a) is direction to Government acquisition personnel to use FFP contracts (part a) unless exceptions in part b apply. It doesn’t say anything about Labor Hour contracts using FFP. 12.207 (a) “Except as provided in paragraph ( of this section, agencies shall use firm-fixed-price contracts or fixed-price contracts with economic price adjustment for the acquisition of commercial items.” I am going to reach out to the Director of your Contracts branch. This is a real problem. -FAR Fetched
  7. Dear DCAA person My contract was with ABC Large Company. Please contact them. Thanks
  8. When I was Fed years ago in the contracting office, I knew of a CO that did a ton of engineering contracts. He took a management position in the engineering division. He was not an engineer but his experience as a CO for so many years over that division's contracts gave him a good understanding of their challenges and convinced them his experience was relevant. They made him COTR over a pretty big engineering contract for several years. He's a director now.
  9. I have a running list of things that make Vern crotchety, I just added misspelling his name to the list. The list is pretty long btw.
  10. What's the agency in question? FAA, US Courts, USPS, Federal Reserve are just a few off the top of my head that don't.
  11. Also - I'm assuming the contract doesn't speak to this since you're asking. Does your proposal describe your cost build up and was it incorporated by reference?
  12. Are you the Prime or a tier sub? If you're the Prime, what type of contract is it? What type of contract is the Subcontract? Is the Prime contract subject to full or modified CAS?
  13. The contract specifically states this? What language, exactly, did you find that makes you belive this?
  14. It's too late for the hard stance, a diplomatic approach is the only way out of the OP's mess. Also - Vern has said that what you've cited is not a one size fits all approach.
  15. Based on the information you’ve provided, I would send an email something like this to the CO: CO Our company submitted an invoice for the work authorized by the Notice to Proceed (or Letter Contract) issued by your office on (date) (attached email). The work has been completed and accepted by the Operations Team (or Gov PM) (assuming this is true). We need the corresponding Task Order associated with this NTP to properly invoice for this work. I believe a no-cost modification to Task Order (insert task order number) extending the period of performance would suffice as it contains the CLINs associated with this work. Please let me know how to proceed. Thanks, Happy Kwanzaa Far Fetched. Note: This is assuming the base IDIQ contract is still current and that there are Task Orders with funding still available (i.e. have not been deobligated).
  16. I'm assuming the IDIQ Contract states that the contractor is directed by Task Order(s) (w/Funding). If there is no Task Order for the work, there is no funding and no authorization to proceed with the work. It sounds like the Contractor did not have a Task Order and was not authorized to do the work. I'm making a lot of assumptions here though. Was there any language in the CO's email to the Contractor that would be construed as authorization to proceed?
  17. I honestly don't think this is a question the prime contractor should be asking the KO, I think it's a question for their auditors/CPAs.
  18. I agree but we're talking about a situation where the ANG DOES NOT reimburse sales tax but the contractor DOES pay taxes. I've never run into that situation. Whenever my charges for State taxes were refused as a prime contractor, I simply complete the applicable state tax form between me (as the prime) and my supplier and none of us pay taxes. My external auditors have never had a problem with this in 10+ years.
  19. You don't need the KO to give you permission to complete a Tax Exemption form for you as the supplier. Your customer does not need permission from the KO either.
×
×
  • Create New...