Jump to content

Government Furnished Property...Is it or isn't it???


NavyKGuy

Recommended Posts

I'm in the process of awarding a firm fixed price contract in support of the Navy housing office. We have furniture (refridgerators/washers & dryers/couches etc.) that we keep in a warehouse and then have a contractor deliver/pick-up when the unit is occupied by a sailor. The contractor also does repairs when the fridges and washer/dryers break-down.

Contractor personnel run the warehouse tracking what items are in inventory or coming/going, but the Government keeps the keys to the warehouse and is always there arranging pick-ups/deliveries and dealing with the sailors/other Government personnel (OGP) through a Gov't GS type we'll call "the warehouse manager" and the furniture is only in the "possession" of the contractor when it is on the truck being delivered/picked-up and signed for by the sailors/OGPs.

My questions are...

1. Is the warehouse Government furnished property since its never technically in the possession of the contractor i.e the "warehouse manager" has it under his/her control?

2. Is the furniture GFP since it's only in the possession of the contractor from the warehouse (where it's under the Gov't "warehouse manager's" cognizance) to the sailor/OGP who signs for it?

From a "property book" perspective, it goes from the warehouse manager to the sailor/OGP and only passes momentarily through the contractor via the contract.

I'm contending that it is NOT GFP for various reasons...including the fact that I'd rather not assume the administrative responsibilities of FAR 52.245-1 if I can reasonably justify not having to.

Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

FAR 45.101 defines "government-furnished property" as follows:

?Government-furnished property? means property in the possession of, or directly acquired by, the Government and subsequently furnished to the contractor for performance of a contract. Government-furnished property includes, but is not limited to, spares and property furnished for repair, maintenance, overhaul, or modification. Government-furnished property also includes contractor-acquired property if the contractor-acquired property is a deliverable under a cost contract when accepted by the Government for continued use under the contract.

Based on that definition, I think that the answer to your first question is no and the answer to your second question is yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest carl r culham

Navy - Have you considered FAR Part 47.2 and the related DFARS? Seems you have an interesting mix of work items within a proposed contract - local drayage and appliance repair. Noting this you may not have to apply the GFP responsiblities of FAR Part 45 if the drayage is conducted appropriately. Exact terms of the contemplated contract would have to be known to comment further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Carl:

Suppose that the contract is for drayage. How might that affect the status of the stuff to be moved as GFP? Have you seen something in FAR 47.2 that bears on that question?

Vern

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest carl r culham

Vern - No. I have seen nothing in FAR 47.2.

My response to the post is that I believe by definition found in FAR 47.200(a)(1) FAR 47.2 does apply as based on the basic info provided by Navy I read that in part the requirement to be for "local drayage" - transporting stuff from one location (warehouse) to another within a local area (base housing). As I noted in my post there seems to be at least two requirements of the procurement that Navy has noted - 1)Movement of appliances from one Government location to another, and 2) Repair of the appliances.

With this noted and applying the underlying concepts of the FAR I see no need for a GFP Clause to be placed into a contract where stuff is transported from one office to another, office to warehouse, or office to a non-government entity when commercial transport services are utilized for that transport pursuant to FAR Part 47.2. It is my belief a bill of lading, which in my view should be utilized to document the transport, is in effect a part of the property transfer documentation and therefore GFP requirements of the FAR would not apply. I have to offer that right, wrong or indifferent that to my knowledge incorporating GFP FAR requirements is not done in a transport procurement and I believe the reason for this is the several clauses required by FAR 47.207-7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Carl:

I think this is a housing support services contract for military family housing. It is not a transportation contract. Furniture moving is just one of the tasks. Actually, they probably have to move and install the furniture when families move in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest carl r culham

Vern - Does not FAR 47.002(e)(2) require that FAR Part 47 be followed, as applicable, even though the contract is for housing support services? In other words even though Navy may have a mixed services contract FAR 47.2 has applicability and again for the transportation related part of the contract I would suggest that the FAR Part 47 coverage addresses property accountablity and therefore FAR Part 45 is reasoned to not be applicable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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