Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About policyguy

  • Rank
    Bronze Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Recent Profile Visitors

5,137 profile views
  1. page limitations on proposals

    Here's an interesting GAO Protest Decision on page limitations that you may find interesting to read. It was a best value RFP to at least two fixed-price, IDIQ contracts, for a period of 5 years. The solicitation was issued as a small business set-aside, and established a minimum contract value of $2.9 million, and a lifetime ceiling of $120 million. The solicitation instructions limited proposals to 25 pages, specified the margin settings and font sizes to be used, and required that proposals be submitted electronically. (GAO Decision B-299305, Mathews Associates, Inc., March 5, 2007 http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/299305.htm). This topic has been covered previously at WIFCON - here's an example: http://www.wifcon.com/arc/forum350.htm I'm not a fan of page limitations in offers but I understand the argument for using them.
  2. This is too important an issue for you and your company to seek advise in this type of forum If you and your company have not already done so hire a good government contracts attorney and get them on the case ASAP.
  3. Option Exercise Likelihood

    In my experience funding was a main concern on whether or no not an option would be exercised especially if there was a Continuing Resolution.
  4. Some agencies, like NASA, use voting members and non-voting members on the SEB. To my knowledge DOD does not use voting members so that is why you cannot find a reference in the DFARS. For more information on how NASA uses voting members on the SEB see the NASA FAR Supplement 1815.370 NASA source evaluation boards at: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/1815.htm In addition the NASA Source Selection Guide provides agency-wide guidance to individuals participating in the SEB process and contains information on voting members and is available at: http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/portals/pl/documents/Source_Selection_Guide_March_2012.pdf.
  5. Acquisition Reform ― It’s Soylent Green!

    He provided some good examples in a previous blog entry that I suggest you may want to review:
  6. Collection of State Taxes

    I might suggest you start your research with The Debt Collection Act (5 U.S.C. 5514). I believe there is some implementing policy at FAR 32. There are other laws concerning this as well. I hope this helps.
  7. FAR Case 2016-005

    It's not OFPP or the FAR Councils that required this proposed rule it was Congress. Specifically, Section 887 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 told the FAR Councils to issue a rule. I believe if the FAR Councils were able they would not have put this rule out but since it's a statute I don't think they had a choice of saying to Congress thanks but we don't think this is necessary. Since this rule is implementing a statute I don't believe it will be subject to the recent memo of putting new regulations on hold. More to follow. It will be interesting to see what happens based on the public comments received by the FAR Councils.
  8. A district court judge on Monday night issued a preliminary injunction freezing the Obama administration’s Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces FAR Rule that was to have taken effect on Tuesday: http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2016/10/judge-temporarily-blocks-rule-aimed-fair-treatment-federal-contract-workers/132627/?oref=top-story Preliminary Injunction.pdf
  9. I would caution that you and your group to be extra vigilant in Paris. I saw this yesterday about Paris: "Arrests made after car containing gas cylinders found near Paris's Notre Dame" http://www.france24.com/en/20160907-arrests-car-gas-cylinders-notre-dame-paris Enjoy Paris - it is on my travel list - but be alert - safe travel!
  10. You may submit your request to change the FAR by contacting the Office of Federal Procurement Policy: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement_default Information on how the FAR is changed may be found in the FAR Operating Guide: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/docs/FAR_Operating_Guide_July_2015.pdf
  11. Found one from DOD that you may be able to use: www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/cpic/cp/docs/training.ppt
  12. Defective Solicitation

    I would check the solicitation and buying office and see if there is a solicitation ombudsman for this buying office that you can contact and raise your issues and concerns. Some agencies have established an ombudsman to help resolve concerns or disputes that arise during the acquisition process, including the solicitation phase, and this may be helpful with your situation.
  13. Did you read the Federal Register Notice for the final rule for this clause? If not it might be worth your time to review. Here is a link to the Federal Register Notice: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/05/16/2016-11001/federal-acquisition-regulation-basic-safeguarding-of-contractor-information-systems
  14. Army General: Screw this procurement nightmare.

    I would advise the general to do two things. First I would recommend he review the Report of the “Commission on Army Acquisition and Program Management in Expeditionary Operations”: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/contingency/reports/docs/gansler_commission_report_final_report_20071031.pdf. It appears that many of these issues highlighted in the report, although for expeditionary contract related acquisitions,seem to me they are still found regardless of what is being acquired. I believe the general would benefit from reading this report and see what can be taken from this report and applied to this situation. The second recommendation I would give is for him to hold accountable the Army acquisition officials that should be helping him, which if I'm not mistaken, is the office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Procurement: http://www.army.mil/article/95781/Deputy_Assistant_Secretary_for_Procurement__Mr__Harry_P__Hallock/
  15. Army General: Screw this procurement nightmare.

    He is a major player in the "system", he should know better. He is the Army Chief of Staff and did not come to that office without having some experience with the DOD/DA acquisition system. You have previously written yourself that "..contracting with the U.S. government is the most complex business in the world. It’s right up there with trading derivatives." If he has a problem he has courses of action to pursue such as he can submit to Congress a legislative proposal to make changes to the acquisition system to his liking and then press the FAR System and the Army to implement them in the Army supplemental regulations; he can submit to Congress a request for an supplemental appropriation for Glock pistols of his liking, he can do, as one of the articles mention above, seek to add the requirement for Glock pistols to an existing contract, etc. As you have previously written "by the spirit of John Galt (Ayn Rand’s fictional hero in Atlas Shrugged) If you can’t play with the big boys you should have stayed off the field...". I'm sorry but I don't have much sympathy for this General. He reminds me of the General in a book and movie that HBO made from it called "The Pentagon Wars" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon_Wars). Perhaps that is not how policy people should think but I try to do the best I can with the acquisition system that we are given.