Jump to content

Finding Class Deviations


Recommended Posts

Is there a version of the DFARS that has the applicable class deviation clauses instead of or in addition to the clauses they replace? None of the "official" sites do it consistently, i.e. some deviation clauses are listed, others are not: the GSA regulations site (https://acquisition-staging.gsa.gov/content/regulations), DoD's site  (https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfarspgi/current/index.html), and the Code of Federal Regulations. 

The only way I know of to find class deviations is at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/class_deviations.html. However it is as user-unfriendly as you can get. The deviations are listed by their deviation number and name, and in chronological order. If you wanted to find out if a particular clause had a class deviation, or if a new clause had been added, I can find no way to look them up by clause number. 

The only thing I've found that comes close is the DAU clause matrix, but it's not official and it can be cumbersome to use because you have to download a spreadsheet and then open and search each time you want to verify a clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took a bit of searching but I found it at https://www.dau.edu/tools/t/DoD-Class-Deviations-Integrated-pdf-file-JST

However it's just a pdf of the class deviation page I noted above, plus all the deviations. Sure you can search for a deviation for a clause using the same clause number, but how would you find new clauses, like a -7098 or a -7099 clause, if you don't already know the clause number?

Maybe I'm expecting too much. I'd like to see a full DFARS with the deviations in place along with the other clauses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Fara Fasat said:

Maybe I'm expecting too much. I'd like to see a full DFARS with the deviations in place along with the other clauses.

The now defunct FARSite used to have the deviations embedded in the FAR and DFARS. I don't know of a place you can see that now.

The DAU matrix at least clues you in to the fact that there's a deviation to a given FAR/DFARS clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Fara Fasat said:

Maybe I'm expecting too much. I'd like to see a full DFARS with the deviations in place along with the other clauses.

Up until a few years ago, Hill Air Force Base maintained a search engine called FARsite. It included a display of class deviations (red font) integrated into the relevant DFARS clause(s). FARsite went away in favor of Acquisition.gov. FARsite was not considered official for DFARS, but it was most helpful.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do I win? 😏

While some of the deviant clauses are relatively harmless, some have a big substantive impact. Take the SBIR clause for example, 252.227-7018. Under the standard clause, the SBIR data rights period is 5 years. Under the class deviation clause, the period is 20 years. Quite a difference!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm adept now, thank you. As for that site, do you know what turns up if you search for 252.227? Nothing. SBIR? Nothing. A search for "data" finally turns up 4 hits. Finding such substantive changes shouldn't depend on thinking of the right keyword, AND, having that keyword show up in the title. And what do you suggest we search for to find unknown additional clauses?

If you didn't already know about the SBIR class deviation, what would tip you off to look for one? Or are you suggesting that we should search for deviations to all clauses before including them in a contract? And again, what about the additional clauses? How would you know to add those unless there was a consolidated list somewhere? Even if you downloaded the full pdf that Don suggested, what search terms would you suggest we use to find just the additional clauses, not the ones that replace an existing clause? It's over 400 pages long.

But you're right, I'm expecting too much to think that the DoD online DFARS should have the correct clauses. If farsite could do it, so could acquisition.gov. How about just something in bold in front of the clause that says "See Class Deviation 20XX-Oxxxx." That shouldn't be hard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Fara Fasat said:

Even if you downloaded the full pdf that Don suggested, what search terms would you suggest we use to find just the additional clauses, not the ones that replace an existing clause? It's over 400 pages long.

Search for "-79". The subsection number of clauses that exist only in a deviation will start with 79. Usually, for multiple clauses that apply to a single part, the subsection numbering starts with "-7999" and goes down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fara Fasat said:

If you didn't already know about the SBIR class deviation, what would tip you off to look for one? Or are you suggesting that we should search for deviations to all clauses before including them in a contract? And again, what about the additional clauses? How would you know to add those unless there was a consolidated list somewhere? Even if you downloaded the full pdf that Don suggested, what search terms would you suggest we use to find just the additional clauses, not the ones that replace an existing clause? It's over 400 pages long.

Try this. Go to the DOD class deviations page. There are 49 active class deviations (if I counted correctly). Look at the ones with attachments. They are the ones that affect or create contract clauses. There are 28 of them. Some of them affect or create more than one clause.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

What is it you are trying to do, exactly?

I was asking if something existed, like the version the Farsite had, where the deviations were integrated into the DFARS. It seems to me that's the most user-friendly solution. If there is no such thing any more, I could do what you and Don are saying. And so could thousands of other 1102s, contract managers, etc, at a tremendous waste and duplication of effort. 

I am not averse to research, but this is not something that should require everyone to do his or her own research. These are clauses - they belong in the DFARS. In fact those 'official' versions, by using the clauses that have been replaced by a deviation, are not correct, are they? After all, the prescriptions for the deviations say they shall be used. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Fara Fasat said:

I was asking if something existed, like the version the Farsite had, where the deviations were integrated into the DFARS. It seems to me that's the most user-friendly solution. If there is no such thing any more, I could do what you and Don are saying. And so could thousands of other 1102s, contract managers, etc, at a tremendous waste and duplication of effort. 

I am not averse to research, but this is not something that should require everyone to do his or her own research. These are clauses - they belong in the DFARS. In fact those 'official' versions, by using the clauses that have been replaced by a deviation, are not correct, are they? After all, the prescriptions for the deviations say they shall be used. 

I feel your pain. This was one of the the reasons I created the DAU Provision and Clause Matrix. I spoke to the folks at Wolters Kluwer about incorporating something in their FAR Matrix Tool that would note the existence of class deviations for a clause or provision. They seemed interested in adding that feature, but I don't know if they ever did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C Culham: Yes. I mentioned it way back in the first post:

"The only thing I've found that comes close is the DAU clause matrix, but it's not official, and it can be cumbersome to use because you have to download a spreadsheet and then open and search each time you want to verify a clause."

It's still not the same as having DoD and GSA post an accurate DFARS online. What they post now is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Fara Fasat said:

True, but my issue is not whether DoD has posted an accurate copy of the CFR. It's whether DoD has posted an accurate version for their practitioners to use. They have not.

Then DoD shouldn't be surprised when their contracting officers aren't compliant with their class deviations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Don Mansfield said:

Does anybody like it?

Nobody has to like it. How much of acquisition regulation does anyone like? But you have to deal with the world as it is until you change it. Knowing how to navigate the sea of regulation is what separates the pros for the amateurs.

Fara Fasat has done a lot of complaining in this thread. I complain a lot, too. We all complain about something or other. But I wonder what he has done to try to change things or make professional life easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...