Vern Edwards

I believe that the biggest and singularly most important acquisitions, the ones that account for big dollars, competitive and noncompetitive, are not commercial. FAR Part 15 is crucially important to the big picture.

@Voyager Have you read the overhauled FAR Part 15? Do you think it solves anything?

On September 7, The Wall Street Journal reviewed a book entitled, Breakneck: China's Quest to Engineer the Future, by Dan Wang, a scholar at Stanford's Hoover History Lab. According to the review the author asks: According to the review, the author's thesis is: Any thoughts? Is the author's thesis reflected in the acquisition process? In the source selection/contract formation process? In the bid protest system? If so, will the revolutionary FAR overhaul make things better?

Hang in there! This won't last forever.

Because GSA is into gimmicks. They call them innovations.

Those questions can be answered only by reading the contract. There are no standard answers. In any case, there should never, ever be an "Other Direct Cost" CLIN. CLINs are supposed to specify "deliverables." Costs are not deliverables.

The government shutdown is inexcusable. It is a failure by all who contributed to it, regardless of position, party or opinion, regardless of whether by act or omission. I know that the last nine months have been chaotic and hard on almost everyone, whether in government or in industry, and very discouraging. I say to all that are bearing the burden of firings, furloughs, work without pay, and business disruptions, that you are very much appreciated. Hang in there, and let's hope this madness is curable before it's too late.

I have been in government contracting for more than 50 years. In all that time I have never seen a memo such as the one at the end of the above link.

Read the headlines. There is widespread uncertainty and confusion in government at every level, Federal, state, and local. And current Federal policy is to reduce the size and activity of the Federal government. So... . I don't know that there is a widespread "sharp drop" in awards right now, but I suspect that almost every contractor's business is off, unless they're selling weapon systems or ordnance. We are living in interesting times, and will be for the foreseeable future.

What do you mean by "funding roadmap"?

Most of the people involved in government contracting are trapped in 19th Century ways of thinking about contracting. We need is a revolution in thought before we can have a real revolution in regulation.

I think the economic concept of "price" is inapplicable to many government jobs undertaken when the future is uncertain and both parties expect that there are likely to be discoveries or events that will require renegotiation of the original contract dollar amounts. The notion that there can be a "price" or "market price" or "fair and reasonable price" for construction, even just kitchen or bathroom remodeling, or for any long-term or complex services strikes me as nonsense. There can be an initially higher or lower bid or proposal dollar amount, an estimate or a budget, but not a "price" in any economically meaningful sense of the word.

See FAR 15.406-2(c ):

It appears to be an undefinitized modification of an undefinitized letter contract (i.e., the delivery order) issued under a requirements contract. Might be an unpriced spares order. No biggie in the DOD world.

I’ve been away and am not sure whether this question has been answered. The answer is: If the contract is written in the Uniform Contract Format, then Part I. Fee must be stated in Section B, the contract line item(s). See FAR 4.1005-1(a)(5)(ii). As a general matter , there is no “overall contract amount” in a cost reimbursement contract. As a general rule, payments of fixed fee should be based on percentage of work completed, not on percentage of estimated cost incurred.

Shipley Associates. https://empower.shipleywins.com/courses/advanced-ai-topics-and-techniques-for-proposal-development?activecontentid=6eba97f9-b72d-454d-91c6-cfbbb4335747&meetingtime=null&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nwsl_09_09_25&utm_campaign=sai&utm_content=nwsl_pr_st The AI essay-writing contest. It's heeeere!!

@Retreadfed Actually, I think you have shown me that I am wrong to think that the release is consideration for the mod. I'm beginning to think that since no clause requires a release, and since making an equitable adjustment after issuance of a change order is a pre-existing duty of the government and something to which the contractor is already entitled, the government's request for a release is what requires consideration. 🤔😳😵‍💫

The CO could just do it. What's to prevent? It would not be binding on the contractor, because without a release of claims the contractor could submit a supplemental claim for more money. An upward unilateral EA would give the contractor some money pending resolution of supplemental claim(s).

The parties have not settled the issue until both have signed the mod. Prior to that they only have a tentative agreement, which may be subject to approval by higher authority on both sides.

I think only two contract clauses in the FAR System expressly permit a CO to unilaterally adjust a contract price: FAR 52.230–6 Administration of Cost (June 2010) Accounting Standards and GSA FAR Supp. 552.216-71, Economic Price Adjustment—Special Order Program Contracts (August 2010). However, it has been done in the past. See Paragon Energy Copr., 88-3 ENGBCA ¶ 20959 (Eng. B.C.A.), ENGBCA No. 5302 (1988): Such an adjustment may be disputed. Note that such a unilateral mod is not conditioned on receipt of a release of claims. But it could save the government some interest on a later claim for more money.

It's worked longer than that. It appeared at 32 CFR 22-304(b) in 1975: It probably appeared in regulations long before that. The issued is not whether it "worked". The issue is, as raised by the OP, how does one interpret "In consideration of..." I say it refers to consideration flowing from the contractor to the Government in return for it's agreement to modify the contract. But I could be wrong.

Why not?

I did. He said he wasn't sure. We both laughed. 😁 I don't know, either.

When a CO sends the contractor a mod to be signed as a supplemental agreement, isn't that an offer to settle?

On what basis do you say that?