Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Texting is a method of communication. But not, for example, when the design consultant needs to have detailed conversations with the government’s project engineer that require the designer to explain something to him, other detailed interactions or government feedback , etc., during design and resulting contract execution by foundry and fabrication, installation, etc. The project engineer needs to learn how to be accessible, how to return a phone call, respond to emails, etc. Oral communications by telephone or face to face seem to be fading these days. I see it more and more. Not everyone communicates exclusively by text. The government has also tasked my friend to mentor the young engineer, because the agency has lost most of its technical expertise and depth of knowledge of the complex systems being renovated or repaired. My friend retired from their engineering division and had a vast engineering knowledge of those systems. Can’t mentor someone who is inaccessible. If all the young engineer knows how to do is communicate via text, then he should be paid as a typist. My comment was meant as empathy for small contractors, who don’t have the luxury of being able to compete for multiple jobs simultaneously, while waiting for someone to notify them of the award status on those they have submitted quotes, proposals or bids on.
  3. Email or even texts are fine. I handle all of the service work for a couple national chains in my region. Almost all communication is by text. After about 15 years of being their main guy things are very simplified with regard to communication. I don't even write contracts anymore. I send them a quote, they email me back to go ahead, I do the work and send them an invoice and I get paid. It's a nice simple system. In my case, I personally perform on all of my projects. It's one of the things that has kept me working through all of these years because my clients know they are getting my personal quality of work, not just an employee or sub of mine. I guess it makes it an odd transition into government work where companies as small as mine might not be as common. I've done two government projects so far and both ended with extraordinary comments about the quality I've provided. To me, that is the best part. I really take pride in a job well done.
  4. I can understand that. Small construction companies have limited bonding capacity and key employees. Their bonding capacity gets tied up during bidding projects or especially during source selections. Their key personnel often cant work on multiple projects - how many different competitions can they be proposed on?
  5. One of my best friends is an engineering consultant for the USACE. The young engineers that he is supporting don’t want to answer or speak on the phone, respond to voicemail or return emails. Unless they initiate a conversation, it appears that the only way to contact them is to text them. Its not isolated to that agency. I won’t elaborate other than to say that we have recently worked with another DoD agency on performance oriented functional design criteria for a huge new headquarters project which the agency wanted to design for the future workforce. The agency provided in depth employee surveys for input. A large percentage of their employees are intelligence analysts, who don’t extensively interact with others. They are most comfortable when glued to their computers...
  6. Thank you, I appreciate that. It is just frustrating. If I am awarded, I have to be ready to move forward and complete a project in a timely manner... but I am at the mercy of when an award is made and if it is made. Another consideration is when I know I have sharpened my pencil and have good numbers and then I am worried about placing other bids which might result in an overlapping project. I am a small company and one at a time is our typical capacity.
  7. Yesterday
  8. In all honesty, there is no excuse for ignoring emails and not returning phone calls. Answering the phone on an inquiry takes a couple minutes. Responding to an email is quick. In many cases, it’s lack of experience and training for the 1102s and just fear of having to respond. By ignoring they hope the issue goes away. I'm sympathetic and know how much time and effort companies put into responding. You deserve feedback on what happened.
  9. Before you wade through a lot of conjecture, etc. let me suggest you read.. FAR 13.106-3(c &d) FAR 5.3 FAR 15.503 As you do keep in mind RFQ and RFP. RFQ is if done correctly is a true quote process and FAR 13 is going to apply. If for what ever reason it was a true RFP then FAR 15 applies. Agencies themselves confuse the difference for procurements under Simplified Acquisition Threshold. If FAR part 12 Commercial Item Acquisition most agencies include clause 52.212-1. See paragraph (l). If not FAR part 12 action then look for other solicitation provisions such as 52.215-1. FAR part 13 action then no solicitation provision exists so guidance of 13.106-3(a&b) applies. For procurements in each FAR category COs have discreation at different levels so pay attention as you read the FAR to words like, shall, etc. Also as you read note timeliness requirements placed on contractors to request info. If not timely COs might be rightfully ignoring. Hope this helps.
  10. yes, I track all projects that I bid. If there is not an award notice, I follow up after a week or two and then additionally if I don't get responses. I've hand a handful that just never respond in any way.
  11. If the solicitation was published in FBO, are you checking to see if there is a notice of award or a notice of cancellation?
  12. The issue has usually been on projects under 50k.
  13. PD216, For a perspective, what types and magnitudes of solicitations are you responding to?
  14. I'm hoping to get some perspective from the other side of things. I am a contractor so I don't really get to see the inner workings from the contracting officer's side and thought this group could shed some light. More often than I would have expected, there are solicitations (typically RFQs and RFPs) to which I respond and never see an award and most times I am unable to get a response from the contracting officer. From my viewpoint, I often put a lot of work into preparing quotes, proposals, etc. Attending pre-bids, writing out technicals, working out pricing and all of the other activities of preparing an adequate response can take a lot of time. It's one thing to not be the awardee but it's something else to never see any award made and to have COs completely ignore any phone calls and emails inquiring of the status of these solicitations. I guess my question is why does this happen? Understaffed and overworked COs? Lazy COs? A technical reason that is easier solved by ghosting respondents? I suspect most of the people here are on the government side of operations so I thought it might be a good place to solve my curiosity. Thanks.
  15. Neil, Thank you for your position, that I find very clear and helps me in further understanding the situation. I was confident that paragraph (b) was part of the flow down due to the first sentence of paragraph (c), which states that the requirements apply only IF none of the exceptions apply (the exceptions in paragraph (b)): 252.215-7010(c)Requirements for certified cost or pricing data. If the Offeror is not granted an exception from the requirement to submit certified cost or pricing data, Further, following the suggestion of here_2_help, I went through the comments and responses of the Proposed rule and I found these clarifications: Response: The standards for what information is necessary to make commercial item determinations and determinations of price reasonableness should not be relaxed for subcontractors. Prime contractors are responsible for exercising the same due diligence as DoD contracting officers in making subcontractor commercial item determinations and evaluating their subcontractors’ price reasonableness. Response: This rule does not alter prime contractors’ responsibility for making subcontractor commercial item determinations and evaluating their subcontractors’ price reasonableness, regardless of whether the end item has or has not been determined to be a commercial item. I'm reading more information supporting that the subcontractor may be right in the request for exception , than evidences to reject it. Please help me with this feeling "killing" or "feeding" it to a supported decision. Thank you and all again for your opinions.
  16. Thank you both for pointing out that FAR reference and for the advice on forms, it's very helpful!
  17. Last week
  18. B2B, you are welcome. I believe you are correctly understanding that my position is that neither the commercial item exception in (b)(1) (ii) nor its sub paragraphs (A), (B), (C),(D) or (E) are applicable to a subcontractor under that DFARS provision as written by DoD. I also have trouble understanding the flowdown of this provision. In paragraph (e), DoD wrote it such that the DoD contractor shall incorporate the substance of this provision in subcontracts, which to me means the entire DoD provision. On the other hand, it goes on to say that the subcontractor shall comply with paragraphs (c) and (d), but no mention of subcontractor compliance with paragraph (b), the commercial item exception. This is an awkward indication that (b) is not applicable to subcontractors. I believe the prime contractor was in error in substituting Buyer for Contracting Officer in (b). That substitution seems to invite making the commercial item exception applicable subcontractors. Thereafter, apparently the prime contractor took another look at (b) and responded to the subcontractor's request for a commercial item exception in the negative. Hence, the confusion and concern about whether to request cost or pricing data. If this provision and its Contracting Officer alteration was included in a contract between the prime contractor and the subcontractor, the contractor could be seen as in breach of contract by the subcontractor relative to (b). If the contractor went ahead and honored its contract language, it could be viewed in my opinion as an incorrect commercial item determination, which may have consequences with its DoD customer and/or approved purchasing system. The flowdown direction in (e) to Incorporate the substance of this provision in subcontracts is not as clear as it should be relative to paragraph (b).
  19. Thanks! Very helpful information!
  20. You are right, "exception" is the right one in this case, it would be an exception from submitting certified cost and pricing data. Thank you for the clarification. You are right, my question was on DFARs 252.215-7010. With the statement above I was referring the other 4 exceptions that are listed in DFARs 252.215-7010(b)(1)(ii), before the (E), I thought that all of them (or none of them if I got your position) should be applicable to the sub-contractor. Hopefully I clarified my understanding.
  21. In my view @joel hoffman should have included this paragraph from 13.003 as well... "(g) Authorized individuals shall make purchases in the simplified manner that is most suitable, efficient, and economical based on the circumstances of each acquisition. For acquisitions not expected to exceed -- (1) The simplified acquisition threshold for other than commercial items, use any appropriate combination of the procedures in Parts 13, 14, 15, 35, or 36, including the use of Standard Form 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award (Construction, Alteration, or Repair), for construction contracts (see 36.701(a)); or" And read 36.701. If you want firm offers the 1442 is ok but if you really want quotes then use a SF 18 or similar format and submit your offer to award on a 347 and ask the contractor to affirm acceptance. And a thought of performance bond for construction needs under $150k. Yes FAR part 28 doesnot encourage but it is unclear whether discreation would allow. I once worked for an agency that did federal construction on private property. The agency put in place a class deviation where work over $2000 would be bonded by both performance payment bonds to help ensure the private interests got the work anticipated and helped with potential liens by unpaid suppliers, subs, etc. against the private property. Sharing as I for one would consider individual deviations for performance and payment bonds if the critical nature of the work so dictated. A decision that is in the best interest of the government from the view that doing so may limit competition as not all mom and pops can get surety bonds and asking for them will generate a higher price for the work.
  22. You may be thinking about common exceptions to certified cost or pricing data per FAR 52.215-12 and FAR 15.403. Your posted question was solely about a DFARS provision. This DFARS provision did not delete FAR provisions or clauses. BTW, you seem to use "exemption" and "exception" interchangeably. They are not.
  23. See, http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/BRADEN.ATKThiokol2.pdf
  24. If you go back to the promulgation comments regarding this clause in the Federal Register, one of the public comments related to applying the policy in the clause to subcontractors. DoD responded by stating that the statutory authority for the clause only gave DoD discretion to apply the policy. Further, this discretion only applied to the award of prime contracts. Consequently, DoD specifically refused to make the discretion given to DoD available to the prime in regard to subcontracts. I still do not see any connection between the definition of a NTDC and what you wrote in your original post. The fact that a prime contract is subject to full CAS coverage does not mean that all subcontracts under that prime contract are also subject to full CAS coverage. Instead, if the subcontract falls within one or more of the exceptions in the CAS rules, such as the subcontract being awarded to a small business concern or for commercial items, the subcontract is exempt from CAS coverage.
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...