Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Recommended Posts

48 CFR 752.245-71 - Title to and care of property.

"(c) (2) For non-expendable property titled to the Cooperating Government, the Contractor shall, within 90 days after completion of this contract, or at such other date as may be fixed by the contracting officer, submit an inventory schedule covering all items of non-expendable property under its custody, which have not been consumed in the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall also indicate what disposition has been made of such property."

My reading of this clause is that the Cooperating Government (one on a bilateral obligating agreement) works with the Contractor to dispose of/reuse non-expendable property. Then, the COR/CO should be notified of the disposition after the fact and it does not need to necessarily follow the priority list in FAR 45.602-2

What do you think? Should FAR 45.602-2 be followed and should the COR review and CO approve of the disposition plan, or, in this case, do the Contractor and Cooperating Government have discretion?

-The Count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ConTraCula said:

48 CFR 752.245-71 - Title to and care of property.

"(c) (2) For non-expendable property titled to the Cooperating Government, the Contractor shall, within 90 days after completion of this contract, or at such other date as may be fixed by the contracting officer, submit an inventory schedule covering all items of non-expendable property under its custody, which have not been consumed in the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall also indicate what disposition has been made of such property."

Should FAR 45.602-2 be followed and should the COR review and CO approve of the disposition plan, or, in this case, do the Contractor and Cooperating Government have discretion?

My reading of the clause, based on the parts I bolded above, leads me to think that the Cooperating Government and the contractor work together to decide property disposition. Subsequently (after disposition), the inventory schedule (showing disposition) is submitted to the CO.

I have a hard time seeing how the COR and CO would have authority to pre-review the disposition, since the property is titled to the Cooperating Government. Where's the privity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your interpretation. It matches my initial reading. The contract in question does not designate US govt property specifically either, so I believe c 2 does indeed apply. There is just an eerie feeling to giving such discretion to a contractor and a cooperating government. Then again, that discretion was already given upon contract signing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×