Minnen

Thank you @joel hoffman @formerfed

Is it possible to have a site visit before putting the requirements for a SOW together? Basically, the vendors would need to see the doors or hinges necessary to do the work, which would allow the government the ability to properly build the SOW. Can the government request information from the vendors during the site visit with specific questions asked, then use those answers to build the SOW?

@joel hoffman Thanks for the response, as well as all others. My response wasn't regarding any clause, but the fact that I could state in the solicitation that "subcontracting will not be accepted" and not have a protest, as long as all work will be conducted outside the US. That's all. I'm up late, but I wanted to respond to you. The removal of FAR 52.219-8 and 9 will be done, but the question was just the overall rule. I was wondering if there was a GAO case on this exact topic, but I couldn't find one. Is that not how you see it? Can subcontracting be removed from the solicitation as stated above? Thanks

Thanks @Retreadfed for the information. You're basically saying that it's the CO's decision to mark those clauses regarding small business and subcontracting and if I don't then it's needed? I would assume this does not apply to domestic, as FAR 19 would apply. Thanks

Thanks for the information @here_2_help @C Culham @joel hoffman. Yes, it will be entirely awarded outside the US. Those clauses, as mentioned in your statement @joel hoffman, if it's included within the solicitation, will be removed. I was just curious as to why we weren't allowed to remove subcontracting as a whole, when FAR Part 19 is not mandatory overseas, regardless of the contract amount.

I'm up very late, but I have a question. Is it possible to remove subcontracting requirements from the solicitation, if the requirement is for overseas work? As I'm aware, FAR Part 19 is not mandatory and doesn't need to be included. I work overseas and I'm the CO on this contract. I was told that I can not do so, but I wanted to see if there was a GAO case or something on this topic. The contract is for commercial services by the way.

If you have a sole source requirement that might be deemed a National Security, must you follow the guidance in FAR 6.302-5? If you're awarding under FAR 13.106-1(b), then would that apply, given that FAR Part 6 doesn't apply to FAR 13? It's for an award less than $250k.

Thanks @Retreadfed and @Vern Edwards

My question is, if you sign a contract on September 30th, but the work doesn't begin until December of 2024 or January of 2025, is that violating the bonafide needs rule? I know we always approve contracts at the deadline in order to use those annual funds, but is there anything that states a specific timeline as to when the work must begin? Even when we sign contracts on September 30th, sometimes the work doesn't begin until late October.

Yup. Thanks @ji20874 for the breakdown. Great example regarding the school year.

@joel hoffman This is a hypothetical scenario, but one that I just thought about. So technically, not sure anyone would do this, but if you had it the base POP end date as April 25th, 2024 for example and wanted Option Year 1 to begin in June 2024 you could do that as well? Just never seen it done before. Thanks

Is it possible on an FFP contract to have the base year as May 1st, 2024- April 29, 2025 and have the Option Year 1 start on May 1st, 2025? This would be skipping 1 day in April of 2025? Any rules against this?

My point is, do you need to provide the information or simply state that it's public information. This doesn't necessarily pertain to the solicitation at hand. @Retreadfed

There's one vendor who is asking for the incumbents award information. This vendor is asking for the Contract number, the vendor who was awarded, along with the award amount. Even though this is public information on FPDS, is there anything against providing this information? When do we draw the line on providing information about prior awards?

Is it possible for a vendor to request an abstract of offerors, even if the award wasn't made under FAR Part 14.403(b)? The vendor is requesting information regarding previous contracts and SOW. Can this be ignored, as it has nothing to do with the current solicitation and this would seem to be propriety information. Even if the abstract was done, isn't that for construction buys as well? Thanks in advance for any guidance