Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. H2H. what is the source of your information concerning the DCAA guidance? I check the DCAA website daily for new MRDs but they are getting to be few and far between now.
  3. Yesterday
  4. What Does "Enactment" Mean?

    See this: https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/howourlawsaremade.pdf And this: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Enactment_law.htm#20
  5. What Does "Enactment" Mean?

    Thanks all. DCAA recently issued audit guidance that assumed "date of enactment" was the date the bill was signed into law -- 12/17/2017. I was just looking for independent opinions regarding that assumption.
  6. Then it is in effect as it is written, whatever it means. To my knowledge, there is no deviaition. Maybe there is but I don't remember it. There are 2 possible dates in the section, with the first one accomplished: and I added the italics in the first and second quote.
  7. The NDAA was enacted on Dec. 12, 2017.
  8. Not quite. In regard to 1, the sick leave can be a bona fide fringe benefit if it exceeds the amount required under the XO. Note that 56 hours is the maximum that may be accumulated, but is not the amount that will apply to every employee. As for 2, if sick leave is required by state or local law, it would not qualify as a bona fide fringe benefit. As for a contractor's ability to substitute fringe benefits for those specified in an WD, see 29 CFR 4.177 which refers you to 4.171 for additional information.
  9. The bill says enactment of this section of the bill. That is it. Since regulations aren't issued anymore, there will be a deviation issued to the applicable regulation. If there is not, the Administration is not in compliance with law. Simple as that. Its nothing new.
  10. Honestly, I think a number of people are fed up with seemingly infinite extensions of incumbency because of reasons (some legit, others not so much). This is what you get when you don't get contracts awarded timely. And I didn't see anybody here up in arms about measuring PALT. In my view, that's another message from our fiends (sic) in Congress that they believe (rightly or wrongly) that acquisition results can be improved, in terms of timely contract awards.
  11. Section 803(g)(3) of the 2018 NDAA states: (Emphasis added.) What does that mean in layperson's terms? Does that mean when the bill was signed into law, or when somebody issues implementing regulations, or what?
  12. S. 2413: Bridge Contract Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018, was introduced on February 8, 2018. This one appears to ask for a study (within 180 days of enactment), some interim guidance (within 30 days of the enactment), and then some reporting for a period of years. There are 4 sections of goodies. I believe this was initiated based on a hearing from last year. I couldn't find a press release. What do you think of this gem?
  13. My view is that the GAO and Agency result should be no different even if aging baby boomers were substituted for millennials. Rationale: The deficiency was state to be a recruiting process that was based on job postings, college recruiting at one school, employee referrals and unclear timing as to when a recruiting firm would be engaged, all of which appears to be objective and rational and unrelated to whether it was millennials or baby boomers.
  14. FAR coverage is adequate.....adding one more Act to require contracting entities to make responsibility determinations or otherwise determine if a contractor can deliver is a waste of pen and ink. PS - I wonder if the Press Release is click bait as the letter it references and links to is about immigration! Lordy!
  15. CF - Just in case you did not dig into the CFR regarding your questions here you go as it may help.... 29 CFR 4.162 Fringe benefits under contracts exceeding $2,500. (a) Pursuant to the statutory scheme provided by sections 2(a)(2) and 4(c) of the Act, every covered contract in excess of $2,500 shall contain a provision specifying the fringe benefits to be furnished the various classes of service employees, engaged in the performance of the contract or any subcontract thereunder, as determined by the Secretary or his authorized representative to be prevailing for such employees in the locality or, where a collective bargaining agreement applied to the employees of a predecessor contractor in the same locality, the various classes of service employees engaged in the performance of the contract or any subcontract must be provided the fringe benefits, including prospective or accrued fringe benefit increases, provided for in such agreement as a result of arm's-length negotiations. (For a detailed discussion of section 4(c) of the Act, see § 4.163.) As provided by section 2(a)(2) of the Act, fringe benefits include medical or hospital care, pensions on retirement or death, compensation for injuries or illness resulting from occupational activity, or insurance to provide any of the foregoing, unemployment benefits, life insurance, disability and sickness insurance, accident insurance, vacation and holiday pay, costs of apprenticeship or other similar programs and other bona fide fringe benefits not otherwise required by Federal, State, or local law to be provided by the contractor or subcontractor. (bold added) 29 CFR 4.170 Furnishing fringe benefits or equivalents. (b)Meeting the requirement, in general. The various fringe benefits listed in the Act and in § 4.162(a) are illustrative of those which may be found to be prevailing for service employees in a particular locality. (bold added) The benefits which an employer will be required to furnish employees performing on a particular contract will be specified in the contract documents. A contractor may dispose of certain of the fringe benefit obligations which may be required by an applicable fringe benefit determination, such as pension, retirement, or health insurance, by irrevocably paying the specified contributions for fringe benefits to an independent trustee or other third person pursuant to an existing “bona fide” fund, plan, or program on behalf of employees engaged in work subject to the Act's provisions. Where such a plan or fund does not exist, a contractor must discharge his obligation relating to fringe benefits by furnishing either an equivalent combination of “bona fide” fringe benefits or by making equivalent payments in cash to the employee, in accordance with the regulations in § 4.177.
  16. H. R. 4995: Due Diligence for FEMA Disaster Contractors Act of 2018, was proposed on February 9, 2018. This is the type of legislation that is proposed when, according to news articles, someone awards a $150 million contract to an LLC with no employees, and who has a record of performance problems. See the sponsor's Press Release. Do you believe H. R. 4995 is necessary or do you believe the FAR coverage is adequate?
  17. Last week
  18. Sick Leave - H&W Requirement

    Thanks Retread. If I can condense your answer, my understanding is: If the contract is subject to the Executive Order for 56 hours of sick leave, it cannot be considered as a Health &Welfare benefit for pricing purposes. If the contract is NOT subject to the Executive Order, the sick leave may be considered as H&W unless required by State Law. Have I understood this correctly?
  19. Fixed Price Level of Effort

    Thanks to all who have responded. I am pricing enough hours to fill 1920 hours and told the project manager that the hours have to be delivered (with part-timers if need be) or we will be noncompliant. There is also the possibility that the contract can be negotiated to a T&M hours billing.
  20. Love was in the air this week with Valentine’s Day falling on Wednesday. If all the chocolate and flowers distracted you from the latest and greatest in government contracting news, you’re in luck. It’s time for our weekly roundup, the SmallGovCon Week in Review. In today’s edition, a California father-and-son team pleaded guilty to using false financial statements and other lies in order to win more than $4 million in federal contracts, one commentator says the Department of Homeland Security must improve the quality of post-award debriefings, the GSA awarded its Alliant 2 small business small contract on Wednesday, and much more. A California father-and-son team pleads guilty to fraudulently obtaining more than $4 million in government contracts. [nbcsandiego.com] The GAO says that the DoD can improve its practices for developing acquisition program managers. [GAO] A new report says that a significant percentage of government contractors have experienced cybersecurity breaches. [Washington Technology] Speaking of cybersecurity, the DoD is warning contractors to better protect their networks, or risk losing contracts. [GovExec] One commentator says that DHS’ post-award debriefings are underwhelming, and offers ideas for improvements. [hstoday.us] The GSA has awarded the $15B Alliant 2 SB contract to 81 small businesses. [fedscoop.com] The DoD recently used Other Transaction Authority to make a $950 million award. But what the heck is Other Transaction Authority, anyway? [Federal News Radio] View the full article
  21. Age Groups of Wifcon Forum Members

    This poll is now about 18 months old. So, some Members may have moved inot a higher age group. However, nearly 47 percent of our Members who answered the poll are in the age groups of 39 or younger. If we add the 40 to 49 age group to the younger 2 groups, the under 49 age groups are about 60 percent of our Members.
  22. I have every confidence that President Trump will pardon me. Don’t believe everything that you read, especially, when taken out of context, my friend.
  23. I don't think the KO has anything to worry about. He'll get probation for giving you up. I know some good lawyers.
  24. ok, good. I'd go to jail with some good company, I guess. The KO should have issued task orders instead of job orders.
  25. Sounds to me like grounds for a conspiracy charge.
  26. Too bad for the KO. I didn't sign anything. He and the lawyers and finance folks should have known better. Another reason not to ever suggest ways to save the taxpayers money. There was no “parking” of funds involved. They weren't expiring anytime soon and were expended during their period of availability. Plus, the funds were for in-scope changes. They were for known requirements, specifically a scope of work to resolve design and construction conflicts in the process system. They were being encountered but not in a specific known amount to be able to be determined in time to avoid massive impact costs - thus, CR was the appropriate type of arrangement for that work. The Systems Contract included both CPFF and FFP scopes of work. Edited on 17 February to add some further context. I tried earlier to not overburden the reader with details which led to decisions on how best to address construction challenges affecting productivity, cost and schedule. The design for these plants were site adapted from the plant at Tooele, Utah, which had not yet completed systemization and begun incineration operations. The Tooele Plant Systems contract was cost reimbursement, not only for the Ops phases but also for construction. That design was site adapted from the cost plus Johnson Island plant, which was still under construction when Tooele began. Due to the incomplete designs at the times of award of those two contracts, there were tremendous cost and time growth. The DoD and the Chemical Weapons Destruction Program had to get the program under better control. So the Program adapted what they thought were the as-built conditions at Tooele to issue as FFP construction at the other plants. This proved to be problematic, complicated by incorporating process equipment specific and Real Property Installed Equipment specific shop drawings in the as-built condition into the FFP design. This included hundreds of pages of piping schematics and other equipment specific routing and connection details, including the Pollution Abatement System (PAS), which ended up having differences as the contractors had to integrate all of the GFE process equipment for the subsequent plants into their construction. The hundreds of millions of dollars of GFE plant and process equipment was all in storage, boxed and wrapped. There was no way for anyone to be able to determine if or what differences would be found upon bringing them out of storage. In addition, all of the designs of the plants and the GFE itself were being modified though constant issuance of Engineering Change Proposals, originating from the first two plants, as they were being systemized and lessons learned during operations. A cost plus solution for adapting the numerous, relatively small process equipment conflict resolutions and fitting modifications (especially in the PAS) was deemed to be the most efficient and least impactive solution. The contractors’ field engineers were adapting the mods as discovered into the shop drawings and field routing shop drawings, rather than going back through the tortuous, expensive and slow ECP process. One would have to have a full appreciation of the size and complexity of this program, the plant designs and process designs and understand the nature of the Chemical Weapons, agents, their deadliness, the time, schedule and cost constraints to have a full appreciation for the need to find solutions to all these challenges.
  27. I think the statute of limitations begins to run when the event is discovered. You confessed today.
  1. Load more activity
×