Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. This is an A/E contract , not phase 1 of two phase design-build, correct?
  3. Yesterday
  4. A subcontractor's size determination is established at the time it certifies in writing that it is a small business for the subcontract work/NAICS code proposed. See 13CFR 121.404(e) as follows: (e) For subcontracting purposes, a concern must qualify as small as of the date that it certifies that it is small for the subcontract. The applicable size standard is that which is set forth in § 121.410 and which is in effect at the time the concern self-certifies that it is small for the subcontract. It is not clear that this was accomplished at that time since you refer to a small business subcontractor proposal, not a certification.
  5. The contract does not say this. The contract references AIDAR 752.225-70 which references 22 CFR 228 "Rules on Procurement of Commodities and Services Financed by USAID". This CFR states that vehicles must be manufactured in the U.S.. ADS (USAID's policy manual) 312 states that there is a blanket waiver for certain types of vehicles.
  6. Does anyone have thoughts as to whether salary information may be considered private information pursuant to the new Food Marketing Institute ruling? The Supreme Court decided Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, No. 18–481, holding that commercial or financial information that is customarily and actually treated as private by its owner and provided to the government under an assurance of privacy is “confidential” under Exemption 4 to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and is therefore shielded from disclosure. Thanks so much in advance!
  7. Yes, this makes sense. ADS 312 references a blanket waiver. What is not clear to me is if AIDAR references the blanket waiver from ADS or not, but, of course, we cannot make such assumptions without CO's confirmation. Thank you for your input.
  8. That clause must be one applicable and included in a solicitation/contract regarding the end item delivery of the door. The case I referenced above is cited as authority that "assembly" cost is considered "manufacturing" cost when assembly completes the article in the form required for use by the government.
  9. You need to read the clause that Don cited, if you are going to rely on that clause for your answer. Under that clause, the contractor cannot deliver a Canadian product (qualifying country product) unless it so specified in its offer. Did it do so?
  10. The FAR subpart 15.3 text on exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals (clarifications, communications, and discussions) is wholly inapplicable to the A-E selection process. Ignore everything you read in 15.3 and instead follow the procedures in 36.6.
  11. The contract is not the final authority. As I understand, the DOL can decide that a contract (order) is covered by the SCA even if the contracting officer disagrees and even if the contract (or order) does not contain the usual clauses or a wage determination. See FAR 22.2015.
  12. Check out the selection procedures in USACE EP 715-1-7 . https://www.publications.usace.army.mil/Portals/76/Publications/EngineerPamphlets/EP_715-1-7.pdf?ver=2013-08-22-094139-520 They address similar circumstances.
  13. I know this one because I do mostly IT services, which sometimes has a mix of exempt and non-exempt labor, and I primarily issue my It services as orders against IDIQ/IDC/GWACs. So this issue come up. Summary: In the IDIQ/IDC contracts I am familiar with, the SCA (I also use SCLS) determination at the order level is independent from whether the IDIQ/IDC is covered by the SCA. IDIQ has SCA clauses, but orders may be exempt from the SCA - GSA's Schedule contracts. IDIQ does NOT have SCA clauses, but orders may still be subject to the SCA - GSA's GWACs (8(a) STARS II, Alliant, VETS2). In both cases, the ordering contracting officer affirmatively determines that this particular group of clauses is an exception to the usually flowdown per 52.216-18. In the case of Schedule contracts (that have the SCA in them), the OCO is affirmatively determining the order is exempt. In the case of the GWACs, the OCO is affirmately determining the order is NOT exempt, despite the base IDIQ having no mention of FAR 22.10 or its clauses. In the case of an IDIQ that does have the SCA language, but also has functional areas that are obviously exempt from the SCA (like OCONUS), I would probably limit making a determination to edge-case orders, where its unclear if the SCA applies or not. An order that is entirely OCONUS services needn't bother with an SCLS exemption. On the flip side, an order that is self-evidently covered by the SCLS - janitorial services - shouldn't have to include the clauses since the SCLS is definitely flowing down from the IDIQ to the order.
  14. We are the prime contractor, and we have small business plan and goals to meet. we responded to government task order solicitation that included a small business subcontractors proposal, and since the the time we submitted our proposal to the government, said small business was acquired by a larger business concern. Will we get the credit for small business credit if we win the task order? What interdependence, if any, exist or is it a simple yes or no?
  15. Thank you Don! Much appreciated
  16. Can I communicate with an offeror after the receipt of phase I proposals (sf330s) for a design solicitation, to ask if they have any additional satellite offices or subcontractors’ offices to meet eval criteria? What are the limits of my communication with the offeror? The solicitation criteria states offerors must be within a 300 mile radius of the location. Right now, I believe it would be a "communication" with an offeror to address a deficiency in the proposal. Right now they are eliminated, this clarification could only include them in the down select.
  17. No violation. Canada is a qualifying country. See DFARS 252.225-7001.
  18. Ballardp, I hope you recognize that the concept of similarly situated subcontractors and the computation of prime performance requirements contained in the SBA rules have not been adopted by the FAR.
  19. does this help you? https://www.gao.gov/assets/510/501296.pdf
  20. In a Navy, ID/IQ MAC award (Seaport-e) - what case or cases are available that support the Department of Labor imposing 52.222-41 Service Contract Labor Standards (Service Contract Act) upon task order issued under an ID/IQ MAC even though the Navy's express intent is that SCA is to be determined on a task order by task order basis by each cognizant contracting agency? For example, DoD task order KO intentionally excludes clauses 52.222-41, 52.222-42, wage determination and any other Service Contract Act related clause in his/her contemplated task order and reinforces through RFP Q&A process with Offerors that Service Contract Act does not apply and no wage determination shall issue - principal purpose is determined to be 95% professional (e.g., engineering, logistics, configuration management, etc.) FAR 52.222-41 is included in the prime MAC ID/IQ award - are ALL task orders therefore subject to 52.222-41 (through 52.216-18(b)) even though the ID/IQ scope has 20 different functional areas that the task order KO can choose from ranging from professional to service employees as well as CONUS and OCONUS (foreign military sales, etc.)? I'm hearing rumors that DOL can impose 52.222-41 on all task orders not because of the principal purpose test, but because FAR 52,216-18(b) is present in the ID/IQ thus making all task orders subject to the terms and conditions of that contract and thus all task orders are subject to 52.222-41 regardless if the task order KO included the clause or not in the task order. I cannot find any cases on this matter one way or another.
  21. I am a very new CS in the field, I have searched the archives to find the answer but was unsuccessful. I was hoping someone would be able to provide me insight into a specific question I have. In regards to the Buy American Act, if a door is made in the United States, but assembled in Canada, does that violate the act? I am also looking for a reference to the answer. Thank you in advance for your help!
  22. As you may be aware, the 2020 National Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 2500) recently made its way through the House Committee on Armed Services. With some space-centric NAICS codes, such as 517410 (Satellite Communications), seeing a 134%+ increase in small business participants in the last decade, how the U.S. approaches the final frontier should be on the mind of many small business government contractors. It definitely was on the mind of the Committee on Armed Services. The 2020 NDAA did not contain much substance on “Other Space Matters” before going before the Committee on Armed Services. If you review the document, you will see that almost the entirety of “Other Space Matters” under Title IX, Part II was added by the Committee. The same goes for “Space Activities” under Title XVI, Subtitle A. These additions contain several nuggets that we want to bring to your attention. Remember that as of this writing the 2020 NDAA is only in draft form. It is likely that some changes will be made as the bill progresses through the House and Senate. First, Sec. 921 establishes United States Space Corps under the Air Force. This is not the Space Force that the President talked about just over a year ago. In fact, the Space Force is notably absent from the 2020 NDAA. Once created, the Space Force will be its own branch of the armed services. The Commandant of the Space Corps, in contrast, will still report to the Secretary of the Air Force. Of particular note to small businesses that currently pursue acquisitions under the Air Force, Sec. 922 directs “all functions, assets, and obligations of the space elements of the Air Force” to transfer to the Space Corps. Congress’s intent is that Space Corp will eventually exercise its own acquisition authorities. Second, Sec. 1605 details a “prototype program for multi-global navigation satellite system receiver development.” If the substance of this program aligns with the title, then opportunities may start showing up under the SBIR program. For the unfamiliar, the Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR) encourages small businesses to engage in research and development projects. SBIR operates in funding rounds of progressively greater value. The Air Force has awarded more than 1,500 SBIR contracts in the last three years, and I would expect Sec. 1605 will result in many more. Third, Sec. 1606 calls for development of “commercial space situational awareness capabilities.” This effort appears to expand on the proposed satellite regulations I recently wrote about, which is looking to limit the impacts of future space debris. Sec. 1606 looks at current abilities to “detect and track space objects in low earth orbit below the 10 centimeter threshold.” With an increasing number of small businesses engaged in satellite communications procurements, it is likely that Sec. 1606 will have an impact on a number of them. Fourth, and finally, Sec. 1608 calls for the development of “resilient enterprise ground architecture.” This section focuses on ground-based architecture that supports all space operations. The goal is to transition to a service-based platform with a focus on commercially available capabilities and technologies. The intent of this transition is to increase the flexibility and adaptability of the Air Force by focusing on commercially available capabilities and technologies. Moving to a service-based platform will likely open the door to a plethora of new small business opportunities. As of June 21, the 2020 NDAA is on the House calendar for a vote. In the wild west that is D.C. politics it is very likely that the current version will not be identical to the version the President signs. We will keep you updated of any major changes along the way. Regardless of your thoughts on this current bill, remember that our democracy affords us the right to make our voices heard. If you have thoughts or concerns about this bill we encourage you to reach out to your local Representative or Senator and let them hear you. View the full article
  23. So you'd probably use FAR 12 procedures where GP is under the SAT?
  24. Last week
  25. Then you need to make the notification contemplated by para. (f) of the -43 clause (if that is the clause which entitles you to an adjustment).
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...