Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'commercial item'.
Found 4 results
For a small woman owned business (OEM manufacturer), what is the true advantage for insisting on selling its product solely as commercial items? If selling as non-commercial items, CAS does not apply as company is a small business. Technical Data Rights clauses do apply but with careful planning, company's technical data can remain its own. It seems that most FAR and DFARS clauses of import would revolve around providing of certified cost and pricing data (FAR 52.215-10 thru 14) and (FAR 52.215-20 and 21), and Audit rights (FAR 52.215-2). It seems to me that the government and primes have a hard time or are unwilling to evaluate "commercial item" justifications. Occasionally, even if the prime has accepted the commerciality assertion, DCMA will do their audit or engage a third party (like the Navy Price Fighters), who reject the CID. All this results in solicitations being issued as FAR Part 15. To state the question above differently: What is the true danger in selling as non-commercial items?
Here is a question: A subcontractor made a proposal to design, manufacture and sell widgets that did not include a commercial item assertion. Subcontractor was selected as a sole source for these products and has been selling these for a number of years. Can a subcontractor now assert commerciality for these parts? Thanks
InNeedofWisdom posted a topic in Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable CostsI found an interesting speech about HR 1670 from 1995 (which I do not believe was signed into law) at http://www.defense.gov/Speeches/Speech.aspx?SpeechID=948. Here are some quotes. I wonder if the speaker meant to include FASA from 1994 when he said "current acquisition reform proposals". Does his statement about HR 1670 apply today? Here was the speaker's perception about attitudes in 1995 when he (the deputy DoD inspector general) was delivering this speech. I wish the speaker had given more data to back up the following claim. Is that so? Here is part of the conclusion of the speech. What do you think about the statement that CICA and TINA together "help add suppliers and reduce prices"? I do not know if there are many people outside a government oversight agency that see things the same way as the speaker. What do you think?
A few years ago, an official (Army? Corps of Engineers?) issued what I think was a policy letter explaining why construction is not a commercial item/service. Has that letter (that I can't find now) been superseded or rescinded by another letter or DFAR/FAR regulation? After many internet, DFAR, & FAR searches, I turn to you for help! Thanks!