Jump to content

GOVCO

Members
  • Posts

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GOVCO

  1. Vern - Thank you for clarifying. Regarding your third comment, last sentance, I presume it wouldn't make a difference whether this was a Task Order placed under a GSA FSS which included options. I say this just becasue so long as the FSS contractor accepts the order, it "bilaterally agrees to give the government a unilateral right." Regarding accepting orders placed against a GSA FSS contractor, GSA says: Either way, not trying to drag this out. Was just curious to gain a little more insight. Thanks again!
  2. FAR Clause 52.217-9 Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (MAR 2000). See, I was thinking more on the lines of why do I need to issue a 'contract modification,' instead of some other written document (see 17.207(g)). Similar to when we issue the notice of intent. FAR Subpart 2.101 defines contract modification as "any written change in the terms of a contract." Now, maybe I am looking to much into the word 'change,' and that may be the case. However, when I see the word 'change,' in this sense, I interpret that to mean some type of alteration in the rights of the parties to a government contract. Having said that, since this is a commercial item contract, any changes in the terms and conditions of the contract "may be made only by written agreement of the parties." (See also FAR Clause 52.212-4(c )) I have always issued a modification and cited FAR Clause 52.217-9. Does this authority over-ride 52.212-4(c ) allowing me to issue a change unilaterally?
  3. Question: Can I exercise an option under a commercial item contract for supplies/services unilaterally? If so, do I modify the task order or issue some other written document?
  4. Question: What is your favorite FAR Part? Response: FAR Part 2. S.A.R.: And that's a capital P.
  5. Can you add me as a friend?

  6. ...and if the aforementioned will not suffice, see also: Reference: The Government Contracts Reference Book: A Comprehensive Guide to the Language of Procurement, Third Edition, Softcover, Ralph C. Nash Jr., Karen R. O'Brien, Steven L. Schooner, Vernon J. Edwards; Pages 99 and 466:
  7. I did go back to my initial discussion regarding 8.4, just to wrap up my initial conversation. Sorry for the hard transition; or lack thereof. And thank you for catching my typo, as I did mean to write RFQ, but my brain didn't relay the message to my fingers. Also, thanks for your example!
  8. ...like the requirement I have now. Oops, did I say that. Why must we make things so complicated. Simplify people. Simplify! Thanks Don!
  9. Okay. What about under 8.405-2? I suppose since you still have to send the RFP, which includes the statement of work and evaluation criteria, your evaluation criteria would be something other than past performance.
  10. What would be some examples of why a CO would feel past performance would not be an appropriate evaluation factor for a particular acquisition? (Reference 15.304 ( c )(3)(iii))
  11. Sorry. I added that last portion of my previous post the same time you added your response. Ah-ha! See, it pays to read, and read, and seek additional guidance. Here, the customary practice is to include past performance as an evaluation factor as if it were mandatory. I obviously disagree. Thanks Vern and Don!
  12. Is that because of FAR Subpart 15.304( c )(3)(iii). If not, please elaborate more as now I am a little confused. Reference: The Government Contracts Reference Book: A Comprehensive Guide to the Language of Procurement, Third Edition, Softcover Ralph C. Nash Jr., Karen R. O'Brien, Steven L. Schooner, Vernon J. Edwards; Page 421:
  13. I wouldn't necessarily classify it as "arguing," let's just say a philosophical misunderstanding. In all seriousness, this is more of a reassurance for me, as I knew this to be true. Either way, thanks for the clarification. P.S. I know this is not the correct forum. However, on the same lines as this topic. I believe the use of past performance as an evaluation factor "may" also be used under a Part 13 acquistion, but its use is not "mandatory." Correct? (See FAR Subpart 13.106-1(a)(2); FAR Subpart 13.106-2(b )(1); and FAR Subpart 13.106-2( b )(3)). Regards! -Signed by GOVCO
  14. Topic of clarification: Does past performance as an evaluation factor have to be used at all, if using the procedures outlined in FAR Subpart 8.4 (either 8.405-1 or 8.405-2), regardless of dollar value? (Note: I am not asking whether or not it may be prudent to use dependent upon your requirement, merely its mandatory use as an evaluation factor under FAR Subpart 8.4.) My Answer: No! My Rationale: In researching the FAR, I am only aware of past performance as an evaluation factor being mandatory under negotiated competitive acquisitions expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. (See FAR Subpart 15.304( c )(3)(i)) Furthermore, FAR Subpart 8.404(a) states in part, ?Parts 13 (except 13.303-2( c )(3)), 14, 15, and 19 (except for the requirement at 19.202-1(e)(1)(iii)) do not apply to BPAs or orders placed against Federal Supply Schedules contracts (but see 8.405-5)?.? FAR Subpart 8.405-1( c ) and (d) as well as 8.405-2(d) indicate that orders should be placed with the schedule contractor that can provide the supply or service that represents the best value. In addition, FAR Subpart 8.405-1( c )(3) indicates that past performance MAY be considered when determining best value, it does not indicate that it MUST. FAR Subpart 8.405-2 uses past performance as an example of an evaluation factor, but does not indicate that it MUST be used as an evaluation factor. Lastly, FAR 8.404(d) elaborates on the position of best value by stating: "By placing an order against a schedule using the procedures in 8.405, the ordering activity has concluded that the order represents the best value (as defined in FAR 2.101) and results in the lowest overall cost alternative (considering price, special features, administrative costs, etc.) to meet the Government's needs." So, Is past performance as an evaluation factor mandatory, or non-mandatory when using the procedures found in FAR Subpart 8.4? -Signed by GOVCO
×
×
  • Create New...