Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'bpa'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Instructions and Terms of Use
    • Terms Of Use
    • Before You Register, Before You Post
  • Contracting Forum
    • Section 809 Panel
    • Polls
    • For Beginners Only
    • Contracting Workforce
    • Contract Award Process
    • Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable Costs
    • Contract Administration
    • Schedules, GWACS, MACs, IDIQs
    • Subcontracts & Subcontract Management
    • Small Business, Socioeconomic Programs
    • Proposed Law & Regulations; Legal Decisions


  • The Wifcon Blog
  • Vern Edwards' Blog
  • Don Mansfield's Blog
  • Bob Antonio's Blog
  • NCMAExecutiveDirector's Blog
  • Professor Ralph Nash's Blog
  • Emptor Cautus' Blog
  • Centre Knowledge Blog
  • Leftbrainpro.com Answer Blog
  • SmallGovCon.com
  • Patterns of Procurement


  • Community Calendar


  • Rules & Tools
  • Legal Opinions
  • News

Found 11 results

  1. I need to stand up two BPAs - both for repairs in our local area. Probably up to $150K each for a year. We can get rates from each firm, but the calls (NTE when issued) can't be definitively priced until the heavy equipment(s) are taken apart. Anticipate two BPAs with only two local firms that do this sort of repair work. I am more accustomed to "C" type contracts and IDIQ contracts, vice BPAs What can I use for standing up two single award BPAs (can do multiple award, since we can't compete individual calls - i.e. can't price until they are taken apart)? That is, do I draft a J&A that explains that these two firms are the only available sources? Having two BPAs will indirectly give us some quasi-competition benefits, since each firm will be aware the other is in Agreement with us.... Need advice on the soundest way to document that we need to awards to local firms that cannot be 'head to head' competed. Regards, Dewey
  2. Part 8 BPA Order Options?

    Hello, I am having a disagreement with people in my office regarding BPA orders off of a BPA off of a GSA contract. So we established a BPA off of a GSA contract (Using Part 8). The orders placed against that BPA are sometimes for services for a 3 year period. Like a report that takes 3 years to compile. In accordance with FAR Part 17 do you have to have options on a BPA order? Or have approval for a multi-year contract? Thank you!
  3. Good afternoon. I am wondering if services can be added to a pre-existing mutiple award supply BPA, if those services are a necessary component of the supplies. According to FAR 37.102(a)(1), agencies can acquire services under a supply contract, but I am wondering if the same applies to a pre-existing BPA that does not have those services as part of the BPA. An example could be a BPA for software that requires training for new users, but the training was not included as part of the BPA itself.
  4. A single-award FSS BPA solicitation asks for both labor categories at the BPA level, discounted from offeror’s GSA FSS, and pricing for certain initial and sample BPA orders based on further discounts from the BPA level labor category rates. There are both fixed price and labor hour BPA orders. While some labor categories for the BPA level are suggested, offerors are free to add their own labor categories at the BPA level for their offers. So different offerors may have different BPA labor categories. The evaluation critera and award basis states that source selection will be conducted using best value trade-off of both price and non-price factors, and that price is less important than all technical factors combined excluding past performance. The methodology for price evaluation states that there will be an evaluation of the offeror’s ability to meet the requirements at a fair and reasonable price, and that as part of this evaluation the “overall BPA pricing” will be evaluated, including the initial and sample BPA orders. Further, the overall evaluated price of the BPA includes the combined total of the total evaluated price for each of the initial and sample BPA orders. Nothing else is explicitly stated regarding the price evaluation. If, as above, it is not explicitly stated in such a FSS BPA solicitation, can cost realism analysis still be performed as a form of cost analysis to eliminate risky offers? One can imagine a hypothetical offeror that prices BPA labor categories with a high price and provides very steep discounts for the initial and sample BPA orders in the solicitation. Then after the BPA contract is awarded to them, the contractor could offer lesser discounts for future BPA orders, making future BPA orders expensive. The fact that, as stated, overall BPA pricing will be evaluated, should discourage this. However, from a practical source selection perspective, it is unclear how this can be done. If, as above, the evaluation methodology only specifically calls out the construction of an “overall evaluated price” made up of the total evaluated prices of all the initial and sample BPA orders, then this does not address evaluation of BPA labor category pricing in a way that would single out the high BPA labor category pricing in such a particular hypothetical offer. Since offerors can add their own labor categories at the BPA level, a sum of all labor category rates wouldn't be comparable. Perhaps an average labor category rate at the BPA level could be comparable, but even that would not be useful as such a hypothetical offeror could add many of their own labor categories and many of these could be low, which would result in a low average rate, even though the most important and useful labor categories would have a high price. And this is perhaps irrelevant anyways since the evaluation methodology doesn’t discuss adding rates or averaging them at the BPA level, or how an evaluation of the "overall BPA pricing" would be weighed in consideration relative to the "overall evaluated price" that is composed of the BPA orders. In the case above, what other ways might there be to evaluate the “overall BPA pricing” and how could that be fit in to the overall price evaluation which includes the evaluation of an "overall evaluated price"?
  5. Here's the situation: I'm looking at awarding multiple FAR 13 Blanket Purchase Agreements for the repetitive purchases of commodities well below the micro-purchase threshold. The commodities being purchased all perform the same general function, but they come in different shapes, sizes, colors, and materials. We don't know what exact item we need until the actual need arises, preventing the consolidation of orders. No single purchase will exceed the micro-purchase threshold, and the total value of all purchases made under each BPA is reasonably expected to exceed $500,000. How does the Buy American Act and the Trade Agreements Acts in FAR 25 apply to these BPAs? Seeing as BPAs are not contracts, and each call made against the BPAs will be below the micro-purchase threshold, one could argue the point that FAR 25 doesn't apply on the basis that each individual call is the contract. But then again, "bulk funding documents" may be used and the total value of all calls against each BPA will definitely exceed the applicable thresholds for BAA and TAA. Clearly, the safest route is to assume the BAA and TAA apply to the BPAs. Due to marketplace conditions and manufacturing capabilities, it's anticipated that it will take a mix of products manufactured overseas in both TAA and non-TAA countries to meet our needs. Sources of domestically manufactured products don't really exist, so I don't expect the BAA to be an issue due to non-availability. However, it's the inclusion of non-TAA items that concerns me. Restricting these BPAs to only TAA compliant items will severely limit our ability to fulfill our needs. What factor determines the applicability of the BAA and TAA regarding FAR 13 BPAs: the aggregate value of BPA, or the individual value of each call? I've been searching for answers, precedents, and anything else I could find. I'm curious what the experts in the field think about this. Due to the complexity of the BAA and TAA, I probably should seek out legal counsel. However, I'm not quite ready to do that yet.
  6. I work for a federal agency and need to establish a few BPAs for lab services. I found several small businesses and one university that can perform these services. For one specific analysis that is often required, the client believes the university does the service best. Q: Does anyone know if I am prohibited from establishing a BPA with a university? The university is in Sam.Gov as a "state entity" and they have competitive pricing. I understand that I cannot consider them under a small business goal. But, other than that, I can't find anything that actually prohibits me from making one of these BPAs with this university. I am calling out to the community for assistance since I have not established a BPA in ages.
  7. My agency has determined that it's necessary to synopsize and compete BPAs established under FAR Part 13. Nowhere in FAR 13.303-2 does it state that you're required to synopsize, and--even though FAR 13.303-3 allows for the establishment of one BPA--FAR 13.303-5© states that the existence of a single BPA does not justify purchasing from one source (and where only one BPA exists, you must seek competition outside of the BPAs or establish new BPAs). I was brought up in contracting with the understanding that BPAs are just that--agreements. They are not contracts, and they are not binding. The way I understood BPAs under FAR 13 is that you can award them, non-competitively, to any contractor. The purpose it to set up "charge accounts," which include agency-specific clauses, invoice instructions, etc., but the competition is to be done at the order level. If you have a sufficient number of BPAs, you can compete among them. If you do not, you can solicit from the BPA holders as well as additional open market sources. So, my question is this: If an agency synopsizes for the establishment of a multiple award BPA, do I have to synopsize orders that exceed $25k? Does the fact that the requirement was synopsized at the BPA level negate the need for synopsis at the order level? ...and where did the idea of "rotating" sources come from??? My agency also states that there's no need for competition among BPA holders; instead, they contend that only rotating sources is necessary, and they are not limiting the rotation to orders under the micro purchase threshold.
  8. My agency advertises and awards multiple BPAs for various commercial resource categories (under Part 12 and 13 procedures). The following factors are used to evaluate quotes for BPA establishment: (i) operational acceptability of equipment/resource offered to meet the Government requirement (ii) price reasonableness (iii) past performance dependability risk (high, low, or unknown based upon customer satisfaction as reflected in evaluations received for the quoter and other related experience within the past 36 months, compliance with Federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and quoter’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior) Some agency COs (and legal advisors) contend if a decision is made to not establish a BPA with a small business concern determined to be a “high performance risk” a COC must be sought from SBA. I question the need for SBA involvement as: 1) we are awarding agreements not contracts; 2) a decision not to award is based upon a high performance risk (as opposed to a non-responsibility finding) and we are establishing these BPAs under Part 13 (not strictly utilizing LPTA - Part 15); 3) FAR 13.303-2 prescribes consideration of “suppliers whose past performance has shown them to be dependable” and FAR 13.106-2 discusses evaluation based on only price and past performance with no mention of a COC requirement. Appreciate any insight on this. Thanks.
  9. My company was awarded an IDIQ from the Gov't as part of a multiple prime IDIQ vehicle. We are currently weighing whether to issue our subcontractors a BOA or an IDIQ. Since each task order at the prime level (there are multiple primes) will be competed and our team will need to stay very flexible in order to win, I believe that a BOA would probably be more appropriate than an IDIQ Subcontract. We envision that labor rates within the established labor categories for each task order will need to be different depending on the SOW and the price to win. If we used an IDIQ in lieu of a BOA then any pricing that we established (labor rates) would most likely need to be discounted once the task orders are released/competed (so I don't think an IDIQ would be as appropriate). Another reason I don't believe the IDIQ would be appropriate is that my company would not be able to promise a minimum and would not do a very good job in estimating a maximum subcontract value. In order to stay as flexible as possible, I believe a BOA would be the right choice for my company to issue to subcontractors but I am seeking your help in determining possible pitfalls associated with BOAs (vs using an IDIQ subcontract). I understand that a BOA is not a contract and the subcontractor is under no legal obligation to accept a task order (or purchase order if that the preferred terminology when speaking about a BOA). But once my company issues a TO and the subcontractor accepts (either formally in writing or by commencing work), then they do have an obligation to complete that work in accordance with the terms and conditions of the BOA, incorporated docs and any instructions included in the TO. Both vehicles are used to streamline orders however I believe there is much more in setting up an IDIQ than a BOA because the IDIQ would contain pricing to be evaluated and a ceiling value which would set off many threshold related administrative work (FFATA cert, EEO, CAS, etc.). I realize that with a BOA, the administrative part would need to be completed with each TO award depending on the value of each award however I think this is a risk worth taking since we can't really predict how many task orders we will actually win or the values. I know that the values can be as low as 100k and as much as hundreds of millions. Does anyone have any experiences to share with respect to services based BOAs in lieu of IDIQs? Any concerns one might have with putting a BOA in place with their subs in this scenario? Oh yeah, workshare to the subs is not an issue in our situation as my company did not make any promises to any of the subs. From DAU website (https://dap.dau.mil/aap/pages/qdetails.aspx?cgiSubjectAreaID=22&cgiQuestionID=18517): The key distinction in their application is that Government is in a position where it can commit itself to a minimum quantity when awarding an IDIQ contract, whereas the Government may not be able to commit to a minimum quantity when setting up a BOA. Further, BOAs are commonly used to streamline ordering when using simplified acquisition procedures. IDIQ contracts are commonly used to expedite the ordering process for requirements of any dollar value. The ceiling for some IDIQ contracts is in the billions, with individual orders under those contracts in the hundreds of millions. Just curious - Why are BOAs commonly used when using simplified acquisition procedures as stated above...why would there be a limit on the dollar value of a BOA?
  10. Protest and BPA

    Can one protest a BPA (off the FSS) even though no TO/PO have been issued?
  11. We have a BPA issued under FAR Part 8 for software maintenance with several options years and we're in the last option year. Throughout each option year we're in the practice of issuing calls with firm requirements and also including option items within the same call due to lack of funding. When I questioned why we didn't issue a separate Call when funding became available (instead of including options) I was told that a call is a "contract" and "contracts" can have options. I'm not use to seeing this practice but I can't find anything in the regs that say we can't do this. Thoughts/comments appreciated.