AF CONTRACTING OFFICER STUDY
COMPREHENSIVE TEST 2026 TESTED
QUESTIONS
◉ You are the Contracting Officer involved in a very difficult Firm
Fixed Price negotiation which is proposed at $120M. At the present
time the two sides are $15M apart. The Air Force maximum position
would allow movement of $8M. The Program Manager is concerned
about the length of time the negotiation is taking and has asked you
about the possibility of offering the contractor a 50/50 split of the
present positions. What would you tell the Program Manager?
Answer: Unless the differences are small, the Government should
never offer a 50/50 split with the contractor for the following
reasons:
1. If the contractor says "No", which is very likely with this
magnitude of difference, the Government Negotiation Team has
nowhere to go
2. The credibility of the Air Force Negotiation Team is now gone
since it is now obvious that only Government management can settle
the acquisition
3. A move of this sort allows little additional room for management
to adjust (in this case only $500K)
4. If you reserve the right to go back to your previous position if the
split is not accepted you would be in the same situation as telling the
jury to ignore the previous statement. In other words, the contractor
,now knows you can go at least to the split position and they will now
negotiate with this knowledge.
◉ You have a commercial item acquisition for which you are the
Contracting Officer. The Program Manager comes to your office and
asks you to explain how a commercial item is supported for
reasonableness. You tell the PM that FAR has an order of preference
that involves three steps. Please explain what these three steps are
and provide examples for each step.k Answer: Determine if
information is available within the government. Examples - Prices
from other government contracts, ASC/PKF historical information,
government independent cost estimates, historical data from other
government services or agencies, records within DCAA and DCMA.
Step 2. Determine if information is available from sources other than
the offeror. Examples - Market Research, published market prices,
published price lists from both the offeror and other vendors,
information from other vendors.
Step 3. Obtain information from the offeror. Examples - Prices at
which the same or similar items have previously been sold in the
commercial marketplace (sales data), catalogs, market priced items
(market quotes from the vendor), cost or pricing data from the
vendor that will not be certified.
◉ You are the Contracting Officer in Source Selection and dutifully
following the FAR and DFARS, etc. on a particular issue. However,
your higher leadership is now giving you "direction" which you
believe is contrary to your legal guidance. What do you do? Do you
,comply with the legal guidance or the higher direction of leadership?
Answer: First check whether the particular legal guidance is
mandatory or advisory. Check out how much discretion you have. It
may be that you were being too strict or literal and what is being
directed is within your discretion. Once you determine the legal
parameters, if there is still a conflict, discuss it with your supervisor,
and possibly others in the chain of command in resolving the issue
with higher leadership. The point is you do not have to "go it alone".
Worse case scenario, if all this fails, remember that it is your warrant
on the line. It is your obligation to ensure the integrity of the
procurement system, and if that means that you won't sign off on
something, then that may be the answer.
◉ : As the Contracting Officer, you were involved in a source
selection for the overhaul and maintenance (which includes
painting) of the C-130 fleet. The effort was competed among the
incumbent ALC and several commercial repair facilities. A contractor
won the competition and you issued a Requirements Contract, with
FAR clause 52.216-21, for a performance period of one year. The
contract also includes a three-year option. Prior to award, a Pre-
Award Survey was performed by DCMA. DCMA verified that the
contractor had the capability, quality control, and adequate capacity.
However, after the first few units were painted, despite passing
quality inspections, your Program Manager was unsatisfied with the
quality of the paint jobs. He tells you that the contractor's paint job
doesn't compare to the quality work of the ALC. Subsequently, your
Program Manager directs the next few C-130s be delivered to the
ALC for painting, Answer: Since it is very early in the performance
period, the contractual limits have not likely been met. No other
, condition justifies exception, per the Requirements clause (FAR
52.216-21) in the contract. Therefore, The Program Manager will
violate the conditions of the Requirements Clause by redirecting any
work away from the contractor. The successful bidder's proposal
was based on receiving all estimated work; subsequently, the
Program Manager risks legal action (a claim) from the successful
contractor.
One point you might bring up is that the contract term is only for
one year. If the PM is unhappy with the "quality" of the contractor's
performance, even though the work complies with the contract, he
should review the contractual requirements and determine if the
quality should be upgraded on a later procurement. Perhaps, a
higher quality requirement will result in less frequent paint jobs,
thereby saving money. On the other hand, perhaps the higher quality
is not necessary and not worth a premium to simply make the
aircraft look better. In any event, the PM is obligated to send all work
to the successful contractor for one year, up to the estimated
amount, unless some authorized exception exists, like an urgency
that the contractor in unable to perform.
By the way, the Program Manager might be tempted to use the
options as award-term incentives and convince the contractor to
increase the "quality" of the work above the requirements. This
could result in higher costs to the government. Also, changing the
quality terms in the contract ex post facto may tempt the losing
competitors to "protest." Before the Program Manager made any
further moves, I would advise a meeting with legal counsel.
COMPREHENSIVE TEST 2026 TESTED
QUESTIONS
◉ You are the Contracting Officer involved in a very difficult Firm
Fixed Price negotiation which is proposed at $120M. At the present
time the two sides are $15M apart. The Air Force maximum position
would allow movement of $8M. The Program Manager is concerned
about the length of time the negotiation is taking and has asked you
about the possibility of offering the contractor a 50/50 split of the
present positions. What would you tell the Program Manager?
Answer: Unless the differences are small, the Government should
never offer a 50/50 split with the contractor for the following
reasons:
1. If the contractor says "No", which is very likely with this
magnitude of difference, the Government Negotiation Team has
nowhere to go
2. The credibility of the Air Force Negotiation Team is now gone
since it is now obvious that only Government management can settle
the acquisition
3. A move of this sort allows little additional room for management
to adjust (in this case only $500K)
4. If you reserve the right to go back to your previous position if the
split is not accepted you would be in the same situation as telling the
jury to ignore the previous statement. In other words, the contractor
,now knows you can go at least to the split position and they will now
negotiate with this knowledge.
◉ You have a commercial item acquisition for which you are the
Contracting Officer. The Program Manager comes to your office and
asks you to explain how a commercial item is supported for
reasonableness. You tell the PM that FAR has an order of preference
that involves three steps. Please explain what these three steps are
and provide examples for each step.k Answer: Determine if
information is available within the government. Examples - Prices
from other government contracts, ASC/PKF historical information,
government independent cost estimates, historical data from other
government services or agencies, records within DCAA and DCMA.
Step 2. Determine if information is available from sources other than
the offeror. Examples - Market Research, published market prices,
published price lists from both the offeror and other vendors,
information from other vendors.
Step 3. Obtain information from the offeror. Examples - Prices at
which the same or similar items have previously been sold in the
commercial marketplace (sales data), catalogs, market priced items
(market quotes from the vendor), cost or pricing data from the
vendor that will not be certified.
◉ You are the Contracting Officer in Source Selection and dutifully
following the FAR and DFARS, etc. on a particular issue. However,
your higher leadership is now giving you "direction" which you
believe is contrary to your legal guidance. What do you do? Do you
,comply with the legal guidance or the higher direction of leadership?
Answer: First check whether the particular legal guidance is
mandatory or advisory. Check out how much discretion you have. It
may be that you were being too strict or literal and what is being
directed is within your discretion. Once you determine the legal
parameters, if there is still a conflict, discuss it with your supervisor,
and possibly others in the chain of command in resolving the issue
with higher leadership. The point is you do not have to "go it alone".
Worse case scenario, if all this fails, remember that it is your warrant
on the line. It is your obligation to ensure the integrity of the
procurement system, and if that means that you won't sign off on
something, then that may be the answer.
◉ : As the Contracting Officer, you were involved in a source
selection for the overhaul and maintenance (which includes
painting) of the C-130 fleet. The effort was competed among the
incumbent ALC and several commercial repair facilities. A contractor
won the competition and you issued a Requirements Contract, with
FAR clause 52.216-21, for a performance period of one year. The
contract also includes a three-year option. Prior to award, a Pre-
Award Survey was performed by DCMA. DCMA verified that the
contractor had the capability, quality control, and adequate capacity.
However, after the first few units were painted, despite passing
quality inspections, your Program Manager was unsatisfied with the
quality of the paint jobs. He tells you that the contractor's paint job
doesn't compare to the quality work of the ALC. Subsequently, your
Program Manager directs the next few C-130s be delivered to the
ALC for painting, Answer: Since it is very early in the performance
period, the contractual limits have not likely been met. No other
, condition justifies exception, per the Requirements clause (FAR
52.216-21) in the contract. Therefore, The Program Manager will
violate the conditions of the Requirements Clause by redirecting any
work away from the contractor. The successful bidder's proposal
was based on receiving all estimated work; subsequently, the
Program Manager risks legal action (a claim) from the successful
contractor.
One point you might bring up is that the contract term is only for
one year. If the PM is unhappy with the "quality" of the contractor's
performance, even though the work complies with the contract, he
should review the contractual requirements and determine if the
quality should be upgraded on a later procurement. Perhaps, a
higher quality requirement will result in less frequent paint jobs,
thereby saving money. On the other hand, perhaps the higher quality
is not necessary and not worth a premium to simply make the
aircraft look better. In any event, the PM is obligated to send all work
to the successful contractor for one year, up to the estimated
amount, unless some authorized exception exists, like an urgency
that the contractor in unable to perform.
By the way, the Program Manager might be tempted to use the
options as award-term incentives and convince the contractor to
increase the "quality" of the work above the requirements. This
could result in higher costs to the government. Also, changing the
quality terms in the contract ex post facto may tempt the losing
competitors to "protest." Before the Program Manager made any
further moves, I would advise a meeting with legal counsel.
