Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

K-Law Atty

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by K-Law Atty

  1. While I am getting off the original topic somewhat, I think that "two Government contracts buying the same thing" is not what JDRYKS meant. As I read his post and the follow-ons, we are talking about the same agency having two contracts to do the same work on the same aircraft because the FMS customer wants a different vendor. In that case, leaving aside the FMS aspect, my response is that the agency does not have a bona fide need for the second contract because the first contract already has and continues to fulfill that need. Customer preference does not constitute a BFN. Thus, I would
  2. I know in the DoD, the DoD Financial Management Regulation, Ch. 10, governs contract payments. http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/fmr/10/index.html Then each agency also has its own FMR. I don't know if this will help you at all. As an attorney, I always checked to make sure there was either a finance officer's certification that funds were available or the clause awarding subject to the availability of funds. I expected that to come from either a finance or resource manager. I also always checked my fund cites on the contract as a whole and each CLIN. This legal review should be p
  3. As I read FAR 12.302, "Tailor of provisions and clauses for the acquisition of commercial items," the ONLY provisions that are required to be included, unchanged, are those specifically called out from 52.212-4: Assignments, Disputes, Payments, Invoice, and compaliance with other laws unique to gov't contracts. 12.302(a) allows tailoring to adapt to each acquisition. In a situation where all we really need is to include things like the NAICS Code, DUNS #, CCR, etc., we find it easier to simply include JUST the language we want rather than starting with 52.212-1 and trying to modify it to
  4. In reply to everyone, I would just say that we are probably talking about much the same thing but can't reach that conclusion in this type of communication forum. That said, I appreciate Vern's defense, which I will always gladly take, as I have long appreciated his viewpoint in a number of forums. I would also say that the FBO search engine does not seem to me to be as inclusive in its results as I would hope. For example, I did a search as suggested by a previous poster and did NOT find the last three RFQs my agency had done. I did however find an offering from the Navy (Solicitation Nu
  5. I'm saying 1) that I don't see why you would need it in a pure RFQ -- not an RFP -- and 2) that I can't recall ever seeing it done.
  6. I also can't imagine why you would use FAR 52.212-1 for "quoters." It is intended for "offerors" who make offers and are, in fact, bound to hold open those offers for 30 days (FAR 52.212-1©), whereas a "quote" is not, by definition, a legally binding offer (see FAR 13.004). Thus, a "quoter" would be a "vendor" until the Government places an order and the supplier accepts it (see same FAR section). At that point, the vendor/quoter also becomes a "contractor." Hopefully, with an RFQ, you will not need to include all the instructions to offerors found in 52.212-1 because you are not going to
  7. I'd suggest you review FAR 9.5 dealing with organizational conflicts of interest (OCI). Definitely you need to get your agency counsel involved. The rules say that the CO has an obligation to identify and mitigate any potential OCIs as early as possible. FAR 9.505 talks about the two types of OCIs. If you have heard Dan Gordon of the GAO talk within the last 3-4 years or kept track of GAO's rulings, an unidentified and/or improperly mitigated OCI is one of the surest ways to see a protest sustained. Good luck. Just remember the language from 9.505: "The exercise of common sense, good ju
  8. I am sure I will be chastised for my comments and my apparent attempt to stifle free and open discourse, but I have to make them anyway. First, Kathleen appears to have concerns over advice she was given by her legal counsel. Has she asked that same counsel for clarification, explanation or a sanity check from a higher-level legal office? As an attorney, I don't expect my clients to blindly accept everything I tell them. I do, however, hope that if they don't agree, don't understand or even just don't like my answer, they will do me the professional courtesy of giving me a chance to expla
×
×
  • Create New...