Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About buddyandme

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/07/1954

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

4,871 profile views
  1. C Culham - Yep I saw this site yesterday and it did help. Thanks
  2. Thanks and I appreciate the advice, its just that I always want to use a FAR citation when sending notices to contractors we are not considering.
  3. I never stated that FAR 16.5 applied only that fair opportunity applies to FSS orders. So after rereading FAR 8.405-5(a)(2)(ii) the statement that "specific small business program eligibility requirements identified in part 19 apply". Should I rely on those "specific program eligibility requirements to mean we can reject the large business proposal from consideration because the contractor is a large business? Just a bit confusing since 8.405-5 (a) says preference programs of part 19 are not mandatory and part 8.405-5(a)(2)(ii) speaks of specific eligibility requirements that do ap
  4. Yes I understand that we cannot consider a large business when setting-aside a procurement for small business. But for FAR part 8 procurements where FAR part 8.405-5 states "preference programs of part 19 are not mandatory", we are not sure if I can reject the large businesses proposal from consideration. I have been looking for a FAR reference that will allow us to reject his proposal but have not found one.
  5. Question: When setting aside an order for SB under FAR 8.405-5 can a large business schedule contractor who submitted a proposal be considered for award? Since the preference programs of FAR part 19 are not mandatory under 8.405-5 and fair opportunity applies to FSS contracting I have not found any prohibition from considering an otherwise responsive and responsible contractor for award. Since I cannot find any reason not to consider the large business contractor and should they be found the "best value" I would award the order to them but would not take the SB credit. Comment
  6. Thanks H2H...this is a concern of several players involved in these requirements. I will definitely read the decision.
  7. I appreciate your input and advice. I've had discussions with SBA many times for a determination of adverse impact for a possible 8(a) contract but not for Ability One. What I do know is the Committee has to make an adverse impact determination prior to placing a new requirement on the procurement list but have found nothing that requires or even suggests I should discuss adverse impact with the SBA. I'm just wondering if SBA would even get involved to determine if there is an adverse impact.
  8. We have a continuing need to provide facility maintenance (O&M) for two large federal service centers. In the past years contracts have been awarded using competitive SB set-aside procedures. Both contracts are on their last option period (5th year). Just as we were preparing to solicit these two requirement as SB set-asides we were contacted by a representative of Ability One who asked that we consider adding our requirements to the procurement list and make awards under the authority of the Javits-Wagner-O'day act. Before we go down that road I have asked our cognizant SBA office if th
  9. Don, the SOW that contains the references to the Government Property is only telling the contractor what the government is expecting them to do. It does not express the what if's, such as what if the contractor failed to conduct a required audit or failed to replace GFM with a like material. In a situation like that I would of course require the contractor to re-perform but what if he didn't. It is then I would go to the appropriate FAR clauses to enforce the contract but if the clause is not in the contract then what?
  10. Our commercial FFP contract for Facilities Maintenance contains references in the SOW that address the governments requirements for handling GFM,GFP and GFE. These references tell the contractor what the governments expectations are during performance of the contract, for such things as "Conducting audits of GFM,GFP and GFE, Reporting requirements, Responsibilities for repair and or replacement ect... I just assumed contract administration responsibility for this contract that is in the 5th year of a 60 month contract. I was reviewing a question the COR had regarding conducting an inventory
  11. FAR clauses are not mandatory for Micro purchases (13.201 (d)) but FAR does not prohibit the use of a clause. In these cases our agency is hypersensitive to disclosure of tax payer information and has required the procurement staff to use agency non-disclosure clauses when ordering information that contains taxpayer information. Can any person buy the same taxpayer information? If so, I believe you may be correct that commercial companies who have access to taxpayer information have to follow federal rules/laws that are designed to protect the release of information and as stewards of the ta
  12. Thanks for you comments and yes we are considering doing just that.
  13. Background: Our agency procures reports that contain taxpayer information. The cost of procuring these reports are less than the micro purchase threshold. Mandatory clauses are necessary due to disclosure and privacy issues. Question: In order to reduce the time to procure these reports we are considering using the GPC card for requirements less than $2,500.00 in lieu of issuing PO's which has been past practice. The vendor must accept the mandated clauses in writing before beginning performance. Can we send a separate sheet containing the required clauses to the vendor and get acceptanc
  • Create New...