John M Posted June 1, 2011 Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 Hypothetical. FAR 9.1 governs a Contracting Officer's non-responsibility determination, which is to be made at the time of contract award. Can a Contracting Officer declare a Contractor non-responsible at the time of issuing a Task Order under a IDIQ contract? It seems to me that this is improper since the non-responsibility determination is being done after contract award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted June 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 I now see that this topic was covered under "Contractor Responsibility" topic a few years back. A lot of differing opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted June 2, 2011 Report Share Posted June 2, 2011 Hypothetical. FAR 9.1 governs a Contracting Officer's non-responsibility determination, which is to be made at the time of contract award. Can a Contracting Officer declare a Contractor non-responsible at the time of issuing a Task Order under a IDIQ contract? It seems to me that this is improper since the non-responsibility determination is being done after contract award. The rule is that a CO is not required to make a responsibility determination when issuing a task or delivery order, but is not prohibited from doing so. See the GAO's decision in ESCO Marine, Inc., B-301438, 2009 CPD ? 234: The record shows that the Navy's decision to perform a cash-flow assessment was done ?to ensure that ISL [was] financially responsible at the price they proposed.? AR, Tab 13, Agency Evaluation Report, at 14. Responsibility is a contract formation term that refers to the ability of a prospective contractor to perform the contract for which it has submitted an offer; by law, a contracting officer must determine that an offeror is responsible before awarding it a contract. See 41 U.S.C. ? 253b( c), (d); FAR ? 9.103(a), (; Advanced Tech. Sys., Inc., B-296493.6, Oct. 6, 2006, 2006 CPD ? 151 at 5. Consistent with this statutory and regulatory framework, once an offeror is determined to be responsible and is awarded a contract, there is no requirement that an agency make additional responsibility determinations during contract performance. Advanced Tech. Sys., Inc., supra. While there likewise exists no requirement that an agency conduct an additional responsibility determination when placing a task order under an ID/IQ contract, see FAR ? 16.505, neither is an agency precluded from doing so, as the Navy chose to do here. Thus, after award, it is not improper to make a non-responsibility determination before issuing a task order. It appears that the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has not made a ruling in this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif)
Recommended Posts