Farparts

Is there a formal difference between "clearance" and "approval"? To me, approval means that some authority concurs with the rationale behind a plan or course of action (COA), whereas clearance grants permission to proceed with the plan or COA). Do I have it backwards or am I not even close?

I corrected my response just a moment before you posted this. Thanks anyway.

1) FAR Part 2 says "Shall" means the "imperative" and "Should" is an expected course of action or policy that is to be followed unless inappropriate for a particular circumstance. 2) Yes, as long as the low price vendor is deemed responsible and meets all other RFQ terms and conditions.

My situation might be a little different from the majority of 1102s since I work in a very large contracting operation at an Air Logistics Complex. In my opinion, 1102s don't always need to see what we're buying before it's purchased. If anyone should see it up front, it's the engineers and the customer. On the other hand, I do believe it's very important for 1102s to see their purchases in action, whether the users are troops or the general public. It might help keep us focused on why we do what we do, especially when we feel buried in paperwork and policy and when our elected snollygosters miss no opportunity to tell us we're overpaid goldbrickers.

I don't see the value in such a pledge from individuals guided by a healthy work ethic, or those who aren't. Ever seen the movie "Office Space"? Such a pledge would be equivalent to "wearing more flair".

I guess I'd be tempted to throw out my credentials as a retired warfighter but my status as a veteran shouldn't make much difference. Being accused of "NSTW" is still insulting to the accused, veteran or not.

Greetings all, I work at an Air Force Air Logistics Center and have about 3 years of experience as a contract specialist. I work with many people from different functional areas on a daily basis. Generally speaking, everyone works dilligently toward meeting mission requirements. Anyone in acquisitions knows that delays, setbacks, and unanticipated events present challanges that must be overcome. However, every now and then, someone on the "team" gets frustrated with the process and resorts to what I feel is a personal attack by uttering the phrase "you're not supporting the warfighter". To me, them's highly offensive fightin' words if they aren't based on solid facts. Generally speaking, the person on the receiving end is being wrongfully accused of not doing their job. I suppose in some instances it's right up there with being accused of being "Un-American", whatever that means. I think it reflects poorly on the accuser, especially when the accuser creates an audience by CC'ing dozen of people in a email or at a meeting. Once such an accusation is made, things get adversarial and ironically the warfighter fades even further into the background while the "opposing sides of the team" duke it out. Fortunately I have not been the target of such comments but I cringe everytime I hear that phrase and wonder how I would respond to the accuser if I was targeted. I honestly feel that I would lose it if someone ever said that to me. I realize "losing it" wouldn't exactly be the optimum way of dealing with it but I'm at a loss as far as possible responses. On one hand, I wouldn't want to dignify such an insult. On the other, I'd want to make the accuser eat lots and lots of crow. How do you imagine you would deal with such an unfounded allegation? What are some possible responses?

A man in a hot air balloon realized he was lost. He lowered his altitude and spotted a fisherman in a boat below. He shouted to him, 'Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am.' The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, 'You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.9720 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.' The balloonist rolled his eyes and said, 'You must be a Contracting Officer.' 'I am,' replied the man. 'How did you know?' 'Well,' answered the balloonist, 'everything you told me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me.' The man smiled and responded, 'You must be a Program Manager.' 'I am,' replied the balloonist. 'How did you know?' 'Well,' said the man, 'you don't know where you are or where you're going. You've risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but, somehow, now it's my fault.'

Based on my mood today, FAR Parts 20, 21 & 40 are my favorites. I'm mentally burned out.

Greetings all, I'm looking for a PowerPoint-based Jeopardy-style game with contracting questions and answers. It will be used it as a training tool. I have a blank Jeopardy template but don't want to reinvent the wheel if I don't have to. Does anyone have a version they are willing to share? Thanks, Farparts

Carl, You make some good points; however, I've been weighing the pros and cons of pursuing a warrant and the cons appear to be winning hands down. A warrant would bring significantly increased responsibility but not a commensurate increase in job satisfaction nor compensation. My mind is not made up (despite how I may sound). I guess I wanting someone to show me the bright side of obtaining a warrant.

Say I'm a GS11 contract specialist with 5-6 years experience. I do my job and do it well. I am respected by peers and supervisors and COs. Trainees seek me out with their toughest questions. I'm happy with my salary (not that a warrant would mean automatic promotion). I'd have no problem retiring as a GS11 contract specialist. So what are the career implications of not pursuing a warrant. Or put another way, what's my incentive to earn a warrant?