How do you reference the location of a FAR definitions?

[UnknownKnown1979]

First post here. I'm just curious - when you are referencing a definition in the FAR, do you point to "FAR 2.101" or "FAR 2.101(b)"? I've mostly seen it referenced as "FAR 2.101". However, recently, I've seen the paragraph (b) added in some literature. Initially, I didn't notice. However, when I looked at the FAR, I noticed that the definitions in FAR 2.1 do indeed start below paragraph (b).

Any thoughts? Thank you.

[Vern Edwards]

2.101 is sufficient. 2.101(b) is precise.

[C Culham]

This may help...here is how it is stated via a FAR clause that is required in procurements over the SAT (emphasis added).

"Definitions (Jun 2020)

When a solicitation provision or contract clause uses a word or term that is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the word or term has the same meaning as the definition in FAR 2.101 in effect at the time the solicitation was issued, unless-

      (a) The solicitation, or amended solicitation, provides a different definition;

      (b) The contracting parties agree to a different definition;

      (c) The part, subpart, or section of the FAR where the provision or clause is prescribed provides a different meaning;  

      (d) The word or term is defined in FAR part  31, for use in the cost principles and procedures; or

      (e) The word or term defines an acquisition-related threshold, and if the threshold is adjusted for inflation as set forth in FAR 1.109(a), then the changed threshold applies throughout the remaining term of the contract, unless there is a subsequent threshold adjustment; see FAR 1.109(d)."

[UnknownKnown1979]

2 hours ago, C Culham said:

This may help...here is how it is stated via a FAR clause that is required in procurements over the SAT (emphasis added).

"Definitions (Jun 2020)

When a solicitation provision or contract clause uses a word or term that is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the word or term has the same meaning as the definition in FAR 2.101 in effect at the time the solicitation was issued, unless-

      (a) The solicitation, or amended solicitation, provides a different definition;

      (b) The contracting parties agree to a different definition;

      (c) The part, subpart, or section of the FAR where the provision or clause is prescribed provides a different meaning;  

      (d) The word or term is defined in FAR part  31, for use in the cost principles and procedures; or

      (e) The word or term defines an acquisition-related threshold, and if the threshold is adjusted for inflation as set forth in FAR 1.109(a), then the changed threshold applies throughout the remaining term of the contract, unless there is a subsequent threshold adjustment; see FAR 1.109(d)."

Thanks for this. However, I do not put it past the FAR to fall short (in some instances) of fully referencing its own precise subparagraphs. For example, the FAR frequently references text in FAR "part  16", "part  6", "part  15", etc. I know that different parties are responsible for drafting and publishing different parts of the FAR. It seems as though sometimes the scribe might be too tired or lazy to reference the precise FAR subparagraph. I will say that I can find no instance where "2.101(b)" is self-referenced within the FAR. I guess I'll continue using this format as well. I'm probably splitting hairs here.

Thanks to Vern and Culham for the replies!

[C Culham]

3 hours ago, UnknownKnown1979 said:

Thanks for this. However, I do not put it past the FAR to fall short (in some instances) of fully referencing its own precise subparagraphs. For example, the FAR frequently references text in FAR "part  16", "part  6", "part  15", etc. I know that different parties are responsible for drafting and publishing different parts of the FAR. It seems as though sometimes the scribe might be too tired or lazy to reference the precise FAR subparagraph. I will say that I can find no instance where "2.101(b)" is self-referenced within the FAR. I guess I'll continue using this format as well. I'm probably splitting hairs here.

Thanks to Vern and Culham for the replies!

Agreed minor matter in the scheme of things but your comments above made me wonder which is what I do a lot.    So how does say GAO reference it in protests?   Here is one example and no doubt there many more and probably splitting hairs as well.

https://www.gao.gov/assets/b-419865.2.pdf

[bosgood]

As FAR 2.101, Definitions, includes both (a) and (b), and (a) complements but otherwise does not disturb the definitions in (b), citing to 2.101 is sufficient.  You can use (b), if you like, but it is not required.  Or, what Vern said is correct.

[Vern Edwards]

FAR citations are like map coordinates. They tell you where rules are located in a 1,994-page pdf document that comes in several other formats, so that page numbers are not helpful unless everyone is looking at the same edition.

In FAR 2.101 the listings are easy to find, because they're in alphabetical order. But that is not usually the case, so in some cases it is essential to be more precise.

Here is a citation exercise for newbies:

Find and provide an accurate and precise citation for the FAR rule about the assignment to accounting periods of allowable postretirement benefit costs based on contributions to a welfare benefit fund determined in accordance with the applicable Internal Revenue Code.

The format for FAR citations is described at FAR 1.105-2(b) and (c).

 

[UnknownKnown1979]

Perfect. Thank you, Vern! Although I am a noob here on wifcon, I've actually been in fed contracting for a little over 15 years. I'm always learning (and unlearning) some things so this was a fun discussion. Thanks again!

[Mike Twardoski]

On 9/28/2022 at 11:18 AM, Vern Edwards said:

FAR citations are like map coordinates. They tell you where rules are located in a 1,994-page pdf document that comes in several other formats, so that page numbers are not helpful unless everyone is looking at the same edition.

In FAR 2.101 the listings are easy to find, because they're in alphabetical order. But that is not usually the case, so in some cases it is essential to be more precise.

Here is a citation exercise for newbies:

Find and provide an accurate and precise citation for the FAR rule about the assignment to accounting periods of allowable postretirement benefit costs based on contributions to a welfare benefit fund determined in accordance with the applicable Internal Revenue Code.

The format for FAR citations is described at FAR 1.105-2(b) and (c).

 

I'll bite:

 

FAR 31.205-6(n)(2)(i-iii)

[Vern Edwards]

1 hour ago, Mike Twardoski said:

FAR 31.205-6(n)(2)(i-iii)

Nope. But thanks, Mike.

I'll add an incentive. First newbie (one year or less on the job) to post an accurate and complete citation gets a copy of The Government Contracts Reference Book, 5th ed. (2022).

"Complete" means you take us to the precise spot where the topic is addressed. Citing a higher level paragraph that encompasses more than the topic of inquiry will not be considered complete.

[BrettK]

On 9/28/2022 at 11:18 AM, Vern Edwards said:

Find and provide an accurate and precise citation for the FAR rule about the assignment to accounting periods of allowable postretirement benefit costs based on contributions to a welfare benefit fund determined in accordance with the applicable Internal Revenue Code.

The format for FAR citations is described at FAR 1.105-2(b) and (c).

 

FAR 31.205-6 (o)(2)(iii)(A)(2)(ii)

[Vern Edwards]

@BrettK

You win! Contact me via Wifcon email with your name, shipping address, and a phone number, and I'll have the publisher ship a copy to you directly.

Thanks, and good job!

 

[Vern Edwards]

@BrettK, You are a newbie, right?

[BrettK]

44 minutes ago, Vern Edwards said:

@BrettK, You are a newbie, right?

So new I couldn't even spell government contracting 9 months ago!

[Vern Edwards]

@BrettK

It's on the way.

Vern

[BrettK]

9 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

@BrettK

It's on the way.

Vern

Amazing! Looking forward to having this reference in my toolkit. Thank you!

[Mike Twardoski]

20 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

Nope. But thanks, Mike.

I'll add an incentive. First newbie (one year or less on the job) to post an accurate and complete citation gets a copy of The Government Contracts Reference Book, 5th ed. (2022).

"Complete" means you take us to the precise spot where the topic is addressed. Citing a higher level paragraph that encompasses more than the topic of inquiry will not be considered complete.

I learn something new everyday. Thanks for the feedback and insight, Vern!

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. 

[Vern Edwards]

Okay, here is another newbie book prize contest. FOR NEWBIES ONLY. One year or less in contracting. 

FAR 52.243-1(b) prescribes one circumstance in which a contracting officer must make an "equitable adjustment."

Where in FAR will you find the algorithm for calculating the amount of such an equitable adjustment?

In order to win you must be the first to provide a complete and accurate citation, as prescribed above.

[Don Mansfield]

There's something wrong with BrettK's citation. Who can spot it?

[Vern Edwards]

He didn't italicize the last two paragraph references! I missed it!

But Brett still deserves his award.

[BrettK]

 

3 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

He didn't italicize the last two paragraph references! I missed it!

But Brett still deserves his award.

Rats. The FAR shows italics for those subsections but doesn't specifically state they should be used. I missed it.

[Vern Edwards]

BTW Brett, you aren't eligible for the new contest.

[UnknownKnown1979]

Although this was my first post on WIFCON, I've perused the site for ten years. 

Vern and Don --- You gentlemen obviously truly care about this profession and I commend your service (both past and present) to mentoring us. To purchase and ship material to the newer generation speaks volumes to your sincerity. Just wanted to say "thanks", I guess.

[Vern Edwards]

 @UnknownKnown1979You’re welcome!

[BrettK]

19 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

BTW Brett, you aren't eligible for the new contest.

Ha! I've caught my limit and am grateful. Just watching now.