6:33AM -- A-76, dead or just wounded??? Hope they figure it out pretty soon.

Why doesn't everyone see the benefits of performance-based contracting????

6:37 AM -- Federal Times.Com is doing a poll on how short staffed people believe they are in their office. Results should be interesting especially when you think in terms of A-76.

GAO has been busy:

In Beautify Professional Services, the GAO sustained a protest against the award of custodial services at the Air Force Academy. An interesting case because this protest was the result of reworking the contract after an earlier protest caused the agency to take corrective action. Past performance in the first go around was not very significant. The second time it was but the source selection official's trade off decision did not do a proper job of reflecting the benefits of awardees better past performance versus protestor's lower price. "On this record, we conclude that the source selection authority’s revised tradeoff decision was materially flawed because she inexplicably gave no consideration to Beautify’s low price in relation to Southway’s higher past performance rating (which was only one rating category higher than Beautify’s rating) and, as a result, she failed to document why it was worth paying a 25-percent price premium to Southway."

In CAMS, Inc., a protest was sustained because the requirements set forth in the solicitation were not the same as what was evaluated in making the award -- no short cuts allowed. "As indicated above, Flinchbaugh’s quotation specified a facility other than the actual manufacturing facility as the location for inspection and acceptance of the items it would furnish under the contract. However, section B of the solicitation expressly required final acceptance and inspection of the material to be done at the actual manufacturing facility. Thus, Flinchbaugh’s quotation did not meet this material term of the RFQ relating to inspection and acceptance and cannot form the basis for issuance of an order."

In Roy Anderson Corporation, the GAO denied a protest where, in an IFB, the contracting officer allowed the awardee to make an upward correction of its bid. A good discussion of the evidence required and the standard to be allowed in a post award mistake in bid case. "An agency may permit correction of a bid where clear and convincing evidence establishes both the existence of a mistake and the bid actually intended. Federal Acquisition Regulation § 14.407-3(a). For upward correction of a low bid, workpapers, including records of computer-generated software spreadsheets, may constitute clear and convincing evidence if they are in good order and indicate the intended bid price, and there is no contravening evidence. Alpha Constr. & Eng’g, Inc., B-261493, Oct. 5, 1995, 95-2 CPD ¶ 166 at 3; McInnis Bros. Constr., Inc., B-251138, Mar. 1, 1993, 93-1 CPD ¶ 186 at 5. In addition, where the mistake has a calculable effect on the bid price and that effect can be determined by a formula evident from the bidder’s workpapers, the overall intended bid may be ascertained by taking into account the effects of the error on other bid calculations based on the mistaken entry. Continental Heller Corp., B-230559, June 14, 1988, 88-1 CPD ¶ 571 at 3. Moreover, correction may be allowed, even where the intended bid price cannot be determined exactly, provided there is clear and convincing evidence that the amount of the intended bid would fall within a narrow range of uncertainty and would remain low after correction. McInnis Bros. Constr., Inc., supra. Our Office treats the question of whether the evidence of the intended bid meets the clear and convincing standard as a question of fact, and we will not question an agency’s decision in this regard unless it lacks a reasonable basis. Id. "

In Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, GAO sustained a protest involving procurement integrity and business ethics (Ma Bell is flipping in her grave). What is most interesting about this case is that although the GAO does not usually consider a case involving the contracting officer'sresponsibilityresponsibilty determination, here they did and reversed it. "Contracts may only be awarded to responsible prospective contractors. FAR § 9.103(a). In making the responsibility determination, the contracting officer must determine, among other things, that the contractor has 'a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics.' FAR § 9.104-1(d). 'In the absence of information clearly indicating that the prospective contractor is responsible, the contracting officer shall make a determination of nonresponsibility.' FAR § 9.103(b). Although the contracting officer is not required to explain the basis for his or her responsibility determination, '[d]ocuments and reports supporting a determination of responsibility or nonresponsibility . . . must be included in the contract file.' FAR § 9.105-2(b)."

Finally, in Weeks Marine, Inc., GAO denied a bid protest involving the acceptance of a late bid which became the low bid. The opinion is worth reading since GAO sets forth their analysis of when a late bid is not really late even though technically it is late. hmmmmm.

That's enough for now.

Been away, but I'm back.

Looks like the next two or three years could be exciting from a base closure perspective. GOVEXEC.COM will be a good source to follow the developments.

FAC 2001-17 is out. It is short but very important since it has the new rules on "bundling." The site has bothe the looseleaf and Federal register versions.

Morning follow-up -- The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has again addressed the issue of seeking injunctive relief when an agency executes an override of the CICA stay provision. PGBS, LLC vs. United States, et.al, No. 03-1986C, lays out a thorough discussion of the standards the court will apply when reviewing an agency decision to override the stay. Must reading for agency counsel.

8:00AM, 8 October 2003 -- An opportunity to excel. For those of you involved in service contracting please take note of the new DPAP memo -- more importantly make sure your boss knows about it. You can expect to see a lot more about service contracting (especially with the words "performance based" in front of them) in the coming months.

Looking for continuous learning credits? Don't forget about the DAU Continuous Learning Center, there is a lot of good information in it.

A September 2003 addendum to the July 2003 Competitive Sourcing Report has been published.

6:50 AM, 3 October -- Three interesting articles at GOVEXEC.com; the Buy American Act is not only a matter of contention in the Congress but also within the President's cabinet; there is also an article about billions in federal waste (I assume they mean $$$$$) and one about GSA requiring their contractors to implement conflicts of interest plans.

Talk about a bad day at GSA, DOJ put out a notice, "16 INDIVIDUALS CHARGED IN ONGOING CHICAGO GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION CORRUPTION PROBE"

6:30AM, October 2, 2003 -- Remember, it is what the SSA (source selection authority and considered (and documented) at the time of award decision that counts. It is not what the technical evaluation board had in their notes or what the source selection advisory counsel knew and decided among themselves that really matters. They are important to document in the file but they do not substitute for the contemporaneous knowledge and documention of the SSA. Dont's believe me, read Preferred Systems Solution, Inc. Also, remember best value trade-off is different from low price/cost technically acceptable. If you change in the middle you need to give offerors notice and an opportunity to revise.

Mr. Gordon R. England is the new Secretary of the Navy.

6:50AM October 1, 2003 -- HAPPY NEW YEAR!! Hope you all don't have too bad a hangover from what i am sure was a great night of revelry for many of you. Isn't it interesting that there was no talk this year of shutting down the government even though e do not have both an appropriatiions and authorization bill signed into law.

WIFCON is back up and has the new FAC 2001-016:

Federal Acquisition Circular 2001-16

Introduction. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Central contractor registration. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Electronic commerce in federal procurement. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Unique contract and order identifier numbers. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Defense against or recovery from terrorism or nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attack; procurements of supplies or services. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Contract financing payments; overpayment notification. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Dominican Republic; products eligibility reinstated. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Prohibited sources. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Economic planning, employee morals, and travel cost principles. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Technical amendments. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Small entity compliance guide. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003)

Proposed Rule

Share-in-savings contracting. (PDF Version) (Published October 1, 2003), 03-24855