Jump to content

joel hoffman

Members
  • Posts

    7,210
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Following God, Family, Sailing, Motorcycling, Hunting, Volleyball; Acquisition, Negotiating, Source Selections, Contract Administration, Construction, Design-Build Construction, mods, claims, TFD, TFC, project controls,

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I’m not sure whether this is a pre-award question or post-award, contract administration question. It concerns the “contractors workforce”, although not the “contracting workforce.” The answer depends upon whether it is pre-award or post-award as well as answers to the questions raised above by respondents.
  2. Yes, I’d start there first. That ought to be obvious. Of course, I realize that direct communications (especially oral communications) between contract administrators/KO and contractors is often an anomaly these days.
  3. I’m also curious, If your employees will essentially be stuck on base with no off-duty transportation provided for, was this addressed in your proposal or otherwise considered before award?
  4. Therefore, I’d also say “Read the Contract” as a whole. * added by me Echoing ji: **added by me It seems to me from the limited information so far (e.g., what are the XYZ guidelines(?), any pre-award inquiries(?), any pre-award discussions or clarifications(?), price proposal details(?), etc.), that the government has stated its intentions in the “contract”. Since this is an awarded contract, I think that the contractor should have been aware, before award, the meaning of the statement “Housing and other logistical support will be provided by the Government.... in accordance with XYZ guidelines.” This is a CPFF contract. Therefore, it was apparently a negotiated competitive or sole source acquisition. Why is this issue being raised now, after award? @ReadTheContract848, were you or others in your company aware of the stated requirement for government accommodations in the solicitation and what the JTR actually includes in addition to per diem rate limits, as applicable to the stated “government accommodations”? You indicated that your personal “perspective” contradicts the stated solicitation and subsequent contract requirement… Something in the pre-award process for this CPFF contract is either unspoken here or seemingly amiss…
  5. Is this a hypothetical situation or a current contract? May 1, 2024 has already passed. Is the May 1, 2025 start date a current date for the option? Theoretically, there is not a “rule” against this, to my knowledge. However, this would skip one day in the middle of the workweek in April 2005. If it is the existing term of the contract option, I imagine the contractor would have priced any costs that it would incur that day somewhere in the current contract price. If you want to change the start of the option period to include a one day delay, you can’t unilaterally do that. You wouldn’t be awarding it according to the current terms and conditions. This would require a supplemental agreement, in my opinion.
  6. Maybe FPRS, Federal Procurement Regulations System for Civilian Agencies, which was replaced by the FAR?
  7. “We” were the Mobile (AL) District of the US Army Corps of Engineers. In the 1990’s, I was Chief of the Construction Division Contract Administration office, which among other duties, negotiated all sole source 8(a) construction contracts, conducted all Part 15 competitively negotiated construction source selections as well as some technical type service contract source selections. Three of my employees, who negotiated 8(a) contracts and I worked directly with the Chief of Contracting and his other KO’s for those contracts. ”We” coordinated closely with the Atlanta Regional SBA office.
  8. Whether or not a firm protests would likely depend upon the circumstances. Also, whether you are cancelling the acquisition or simply rejecting and replacing the firm. @LindaF, the original poster, didn’t explain which scenario she is asking about. We occasionally rejected sole source 8(a) proposals for various reasons and in coordination with SBA, to replace the SBA’s nominated firm with another firm. Never Protested. We once cancelled a sole source 8(a) procurement for an urban street overpass at a railroad crossing in northern Mississippi, due to unreasonable pricing and unsuccessful negotiations to reduce it. It was also obvious that the arrangement was a front for a couple of non-disadvantaged subcontractors. We converted it to a competitive small business set-aside. The resulting contract was something like 40% lower in price than the original, sole source Proposal. ———————————— Oddly, one of the original proposed subs apparently confused me with somebody else. He called me during the second RFP pre-proposal period to ask if I was “still interested” in being a sub for the converted acquisition. I informed him that I was the COE person that he had negotiated with on the 8(a) procurement. He became flustered, apologized and ended the conversation!
  9. So, you don’t know if they were professional Architect/Engineer services, as generally defined in FAR 2.101 and 36.6 for such activities as the planning, mapping, design and engineering services for real property, also including soils engineering, roads, airports, dams, levees, etc. that are required to be performed or approved by a person licensed, registered, or certified to provide those services. That is versus engineering services for machines, materials, instruments, processes, aeronautics, astronautics non-building (or e.g., non-flood control) systems, software and hardware, etc.
  10. Ask the assigned/appropriated point of contract for this acquisition. It doesn’t matter what interpretation we give you in this Forum.
  11. I read the Snyder Docket that Bob provided the link to above at https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-108/299752/20240205125638057_Snyder Joint Appendix.pdf It appears that Mayor Snyder was prosecuted for soliciting and accepting a bribe(a) from the owners of a Peterbilt dealership for the purchase of two sanitation trucks for the City of Portage, Indiana. In addition, there were indictments for other bribes or gratuities. I didn’t see where the link includes the outcome of the case concerning the Peterbilt trucks. There were several days of testimony concerning the alleged nature of payments to Snyder for various alleged consulting services as well as interactions and communications between the parties. Im not a lawyer.
×
×
  • Create New...