Jump to content

Commercial Item Determination


Fara Fasat

Recommended Posts

Is there a place within DoD where you can get a determination on whether a product is a commercial item, or is that decision made on each individual contract by every CO?

Here's the situation - before issuing the last solicitation, the CO asked whether we could show any commercial purchase orders for the part. No? Then it's not a commercial item. No questions about "of a type", no questions about whether it was modified, no questions about whether any other manufacturer made it. That was obviously lazy and inadequate market research, but challenging her only made her mad.

So is there a board, office, division, whatever, where you can get a determination that will apply to all purchases of a part, or a class of parts? Or are we stuck with the whims of an individual CO in every buying office for every purchase?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your CO's response is somewhat contradictory to the definition of Commercial Items at FAR 2.101. There is not any requirement that a previous CO determined it commercial, only that "...customarily used by the general public or by non-governmental entities for purposes other than governmental purposes..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agency and procuring activity competition advocates are responsible for promoting the acquisition of commercial items - see FAR 6.502(a) & 6.502(B). I would suggest you contact the Competition Advocate of the buying activity of your CO for assistance. Many times this office is located on the Chief Counsel or similar Legal Office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards
So is there a board, office, division, whatever, where you can get a determination that will apply to all purchases of a part, or a class of parts? Or are we stuck with the whims of an individual CO in every buying office for every purchase?

I don't know of any central office where you can go for a decision other than the CO. But you are not stuck with the "whims" of the CO. You can submit a nonmonetary claim for an official interpretation of the contract, demand a final decision of the CO, and appeal to the cognizant board of contract appeals or the Court of Federal Claims if you are not willing to accept the CO's decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fara Fasat wrote "Here's the situation - before issuing the last solicitation, the CO asked whether we could show any commercial purchase orders for the part. No? Then it's not a commercial item."

I know of a company that claims commerciality and has the commercial P.O.'s to prove it. That doesn't keep the CO from demanding cost data ("[non-certified] cost or pricing data") to support proposed pricing. This drives the company nuts because they don't account for costs in the traditional government contractor way. (Example: their manufacturing people don't track time to a particular "project" because all boxes in the factory are the much the same and manufacturing labor is treated as a fixed production cost. So there is no easy way to tell how much labor was spent for any particular P.O., or even how much manufacturing labor is direct versus indirect.) My point here is that even a commercial item determination from the CO may not relieve the contractor from having to address some tough issues.

If I were in Fara Fasat's seat and wanted to claim commerciality, I would submit a list of commercial (non-governmental) customers and be prepared to provide the prices paid by those customers. If I was relying on "offered for sale" versus actually sold, then I would provide a catalog or some other marketing material that would show the product is actually offered for sale to the general marketplace.

I would try to slide past the "of a type" argument, unless the CO challenged what I submitted as being different from the item being solicited. In that case, I would hand over a White Paper, prepared by my technical team, that discussed the differences between what was solicited and my standard commercial item; if my technical team could not coclude that the differences were insignificant, then I would give up the fight. But if they did conclude that the solicited item was not significantly different from the standard commercial item, I would fight the CO on the issue.

To sum up, those contractors seeking a determination of commerciality should be prepared. They should invest in preparing to support their position, preferably before receiving an RFP but certainly as part of the proposal effort.

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That particular contract action by that CO was not a big problem -- under the TINA threshold, sole source. We shrugged it off at the time. BUT, it had a cascading effect. A prime buyer saw the synopsis, said, Aha, it's not a commercial item, and demanded C or P data. We had been battling with that prime for awhile over this issue, with the prime refusing to agree it was commercial because he wanted to see cost data. That CO's incompetent decision reinforced his own misapplication of the law.

That's why we're looking for a body/board/office/panel/committee etc to get a commercial item determination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

H2H - your reply came in while I was writing my last post. We did all that, and we're beyond that point. The CO wanted to see commercial POs for that product, sold by us. She actually suggested that I educate myself on the law when I tried to explain how modifications were allowed. Going further was pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Vern,

If I understand the scenario, this is a pre-award concern. There's no contract dispute and you can't submit a CDA claim to the CO for an interpretation of the contract. The bid protest route would seem to be available.

OLG

I took it to be a postaward problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FF,

It sounds like you have done all you could do. Ultimately, it comes down to a management decision: do you or do you not want the business? If you decide you want the business, you have to abandon claims of commerciality and provide cost or pricing data to your customers. If you stand on commerciality, you have to be willing to walk away from the business.

Naturally, there may be additional costs associated with moving toward a traditional government contractor cost accounting and compliance structure. Make sure your government and prime customers pay their fair share of such additional costs.

H2H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I take it that the answer is that there is no place to get a commercial item determination except on each individual contract action.

2. It's a sad commentary on contracting when people whose ignorance of the law and regs, and frankly, their jobs, can force a company to choose between walking away from business or incurring additional costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would still suggest contacting the CO's Competition Advocate and discuss this action preferably in a face to face meeting that includes the CO. The Compettion Advocate is charged with promoting commercial acquisition. Additionally, it can't hurt to have another office e.g. Competition Advocate outside of contracting looking at the situation and they may see it your way and get you what you are looking for. It's worth a try. Also it would provide your Management with additional informtion to make a more informed decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fara Fasat,

There is another perspective, you know -- maybe the contracting officer you're dealing with has had too many instances where contractor representatives, maybe with the support of Govenrment program officials, try to disguise their products or especially services as "commercial" for the sole reason of getting higher prices without the scrutiny that the Truth in Negotiations Act requires. I think H2H at no. 11 balances it well -- if you want the business, you have to dance to the music. If you don't like the music in one barn, you can go to another barn.

I fully support the practice of a contracting officer looking at the facts and making a decision.

Where someone wants a second opinion, he or she can get one -- file a protest (before award) or a claim (after award) or simply send a kind letter to the chief of the contracting office asking for a re-visit of the contracting officer's decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the problem -- the CO refused to look at the facts. The definition does not require that the same part be sold commercially. If it was, it would be COTS.

Look at it this way -- Congress created a class of items called commercial items. If a product fits in that class, then certain consequences follow, such as exemption from TINA, CAS, and other requirements. You may not like it, but it's no longer your choice, it's the law. The one not dancing to the music is the CO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Fara:

What exactly is the problem? Is the CO issuing a solicitation using other than FAR Part 12 terms? Do you think the solicitation should be issued pursuant to FAR Part 12?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That started it, and led to the question about other ways to get a CI determination besides on each contract action.

The other part of the problem is the ignorance of, misapplication of, or just plain refusal to follow the commercial item law that Congress created. I will concede up front that there are contractors that stretch it and abuse it. However, in my opinion, there is no excuse for a CO whose knowledge is so limited that she applies a COTS test and refuses to listen to anything else. It is endlessly frustrating to try to conduct your business on a commercial item basis, and then run into people, both on the government and prime side, who can't deal with it. I could tell several stories about primes who would hold a CI decision hostage until you agreed to give them cost data.

I don't have suggestions, so this is probably nothing more than a rant at this point. I appreciate the suggestions on other ways to get a CI determination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Has the government specified an item or service that is commercial in nature, but is refusing to acknowledge it as such? Or are you offering a commercial item in response to the government's noncommercial specification?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

I just wanted to understand the context of the problem. It doesn't really matter.

As for where to go: (1) If you are challenging the terms of a solicitation or the evaluation of a proposal, you can protest to the agency, the GAO, or the COFC. (2) If the question comes up after award and is a matter of contract compliance, you can submit a claim to the CO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I understand. I was looking more for a solution to the broader scope, not this particular acquisition. Maybe a database of NSNs that are commercial, maybe a central CI determination office. Who knows? It just seems inefficient that a determination must be made in every contract action by a different CO every time. That leads to inconsistent determinations as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

I agree that it's inefficient. The inefficiency is the inevitable result of a complex definition that is designed to relax the laws and regulations, e.g., TINA, for a rather amorphous class of things while maintaining them for all other things and leaving the decision to individual officials. The "of a type" rule is very controversial. See http://www.federalti...l-buying-rules.

That might explain the CO's reluctance to accept your "of a type" argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify - we weren't trying to use "of a type." The item was modified in the same way it is for all commercial customers, as the definition allows. Not that it would have mattered. The CO only wanted to see prior commercial sales of the same part. That's COTS, not a commercial item.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

It was not unreasonable for the CO to ask for proof of sales to the public. See paragraph (1)(i) of the definition. That is not the only criterion of commerciality, but it is the clearest one from a CO's standpoint.

We get it that you're unhappy with the CO and think that he/she was unreasonable, but we're hearing only your side of the story. You know what your options are in the future. Let us know what you did and how you came out if this comes up again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll have to agree to disagree. I just cannot agree that it is reasonable for the CO to cut off any discussion of anything other than COTS sales, and then suggest that I was the one who didn't understand the definition. In fact it's uninformed, to put it politely. True, (1)(I) may be the clearest (i.e. easiest) criterion; applying the other parts of the definition requires a little more effort. She cut off all but a small subset of commercial items. Why are you letting her off the hook?

Of course, that's only my side. ;) However, you have my word that it was a very short conversation, consisting only of the above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...