Contracting Officer warrant board
questions
You are the PCO for a major competitive negotiated source selection. The RFP, which
reflects the user's requirements and is based on the user's budget, has a requirement
for 220 cargo loaders to be delivered at 55 per year over the next four years. One
offeror proposes to deliver all 220 loaders in the first year at a dramatically reduced
price. Can you accept the offeror's proposal? What factors should you consider in your
decision? - ANS-You can accept the offeror's proposal under certain circumstances.
Firstly, what did the RFP say about alternate proposals? Is this a situation where
requirements are changed and the other offerors should be allowed to propose on the
basis of the changed requirements? You need to ask the user if he wants all 220 in the
first year and are the operating locations physically able to accommodate their loaders
in the first year. Finally, the offeror could be taken into discussions and asked to conform
to the RFP with there being the possibility of not being selected for award or elimination
from the competitive range if the proposal is not made compliant with the RFP.
You are the PCO on a new $2B aircraft development program. The program is in
contract negotiations for a Fixed Price Incentive (Firm Target) System Development and
Demonstration contract award to a sole source contractor. The program director, a
fast-burning young colonel, e-mails you that she is very concerned with the aircraft's
ultimate speed at the full specification payload. She would like the contractor to achieve
the faster, desired objective speed rather than the mandatory threshold speed, and
thinks that an objective performance incentive would be the way to go to achieve her
goal. You are asked to go to her office and discuss the matter and the issues involved in
using such an incentive. What do you tell the colonel? - ANS-There are a number of
considerations for the colonel:
The desired additional speed should provide benefit to the Government in order to
justify the expenditure of funds to achieve it. The colonel should be able to articulate the
justification.
The situation is very amenable to a classic performance incentive that would allow the
contractor to earn profit for achieving the desired speed above and beyond what the
final FPIF profit would be for achieving threshold speed. If the contractor perceives this
can't happen, he will either not sign up to the incentive or will ignore it from Day One.
,The incentive and resulting payment have to be structured so as to be based on
observable, measurable results that would determine how much is earned by the
contractor. Subjectivity is not allowable under current AF policy without HCA approval.
We have to be very careful to understand what possible unintended consequences
could be caused by the existence of this feature in the contract. For example, will the
contractor reduce aircraft weight beyond safe limits in order to help achieve the
payment? Also, will the contractor consume excessive schedule to get the extra speed?
There has to be a cost incentive in place so that the contractor doesn't spend an
unconstrained amount of money to win the payment, such as under a CPFF contract.
The FPIF share line serves this purpose when balanced against the incentive.
The incentive has to be balanced with the FPIF share line so that the contractor doesn't
spend more money to achieve the desired speed than he has potential to earn by
receiving the payment. Similarly, the contractor can't be allowed to spend an excessive
amount of money with little cost penalty to achieve success.
In some cases, Contracting Officers are also Grants Officers. They can award Grants
and Assistance Instruments as well as contracts. What is Assistance? How does it differ
from Acquisition? What gives the Grants Officers their authority to enter into assistance?
What are the types of Assistance? - ANS-When the principal purpose is to transfer a
thing of value, to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by law
of the United States, it is Assistance.
Acquisition, by contrast, has the principal purpose of acquiring property or services for
the direct benefit or use of the United States Government.
Federal agencies must be authorized by statute to support or stimulate a public
purpose. The statutory authority from Congress must exist either in broad legislation or
in a program-specific statute. Absent that statutory authority, a Grants Officer may not
use an assistance instrument.
Authorities to issue Assistance can be of three types: (1) Provide to the Secretary of
Defense by statute, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2391; (2) Authority provided to DoD components
that requires no delegation by the Secretary of Defense, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2358; (3)
Authority coming indirectly from statutes, i.e., federal statute authorizing a program that
is consistent with using a grant or cooperative agreement.
Two types of Assistance are Grants and Cooperative Agreements. They differ in the
following way: In a Grant, substantial involvement is not expected between the agency
and the recipient. In Cooperative Agreement, substantial involvement is expected
between the agency and the recipient. Cooperative Agreements, then, are particularly
useful in the research arena when the Government is interested in being involved in
program decisions or may be doing some testing or research themselves.
,You are the Contracting Officer on a new Research and Development program.
Proposals were recently received in response to a Broad Agency Announcement, and a
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type is anticipated. The proposal most favored by the
technical team was priced significantly under what was estimated for the effort. The
contractor proposed fee in an amount that equates to 20% of the estimated cost. The
users have more than enough funds to cover the proposal and want you to accept the
price as is. How should you advise the user and what factors should you consider in
determining a reasonable fee? - ANS-The statutory limitation on fee for CPFF type
contracts do no permit exceeding 15% of estimated cost for experimental,
developmental, or research performed under a CPFF contract. Since the proposed
amount of fee is outside the statutory limitations you need to determine what a fair and
reasonable rate is that falls within the limitations. The FAR recommends a structured
approach for determining fee such as Weighted Guidelines. If a cost reasonableness
review determines the estimated costs to be acceptable, we can still negotiate and
adjust the fee.
You are the Contracting Officer for a well established transport aircraft program. The
program is nearing the end of production. A Program Manager approaches you
requesting that you issue a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) to support the
development of a source list to supply active noise reducing headsets. The headsets
are commercially available from multiple sources and the PM wants to receive
performance specification sheets from each offeror and then request sample headsets
be submitted for testing. The end result of the effort will be the development of a source
list that can be used by various government entities to individually procure the needed
headsets for their specific requirements. The PM tells you that he will not be procuring
any of the headsets as a result of the BAA. What do you advise the PM? - ANS-You
should advise the PM that BAAs are a method of solicitation and can only be used if the
Government intends to award a contract. You might suggest that the development of the
source list could be achieved by issuing a Sources Sought Synopsis with the synopsis
specifying the 2 step process (spec sheets first and then sample headsets from
selected offerors), and the ultimate intent of the process, e.g., a source list for use by
individual users in future procurements. You might also advise the PM that there could
be liability issues associated with the use, handling, and return of the headsets to the
offerors and that it might be appropriate for the Government to cover shipping and any
damage/wear to the units for the testing.
A. Under what circumstances is ratification of an unauthorized commitment permitted?
, B. In general, what are the generic procedures for handling ratification actions?
C. Who are the approval authorities for ratifications? - ANS-A. If the contract award
would have been proper if executed by a warranted PCO, the price can be determined
to be fair and reasonable, and there must have been enough of the proper type of
funding available to pay for the item both at the time of the commitment and at the time
of the ratification.
B. An investigation is required to be completed within 30 days of discovery of the
unauthorized commitment explaining how and why it occurred, how future occurrences
will be avoided, and describing any corrective actions taken against responsible
individuals. Legal review is also required.
C. The ratification approving official for all unauthorized commitments valued at or
above $1M is the SPE. The ratification approving official for all Non-DISA unauthorized
commitments (regardless of amount) and DISA unauthorized commitments valued
below $1M is the HCA. (DARS 1.602-3(b)(2))
You are the Contracting Officer for a much-delayed effort. On Friday you finally receive
the necessary authority to release the contract for signature. It's late on Friday afternoon
when you e-mail the modification to the contractor for signature. The only person at the
contractor's office on Friday afternoon is the Company President's 17 year old daughter
who is working there as a summer-hire secretary. She knows her father urgently wants
the contract modification so she signs the document and returns it to your office. You
note the last name is the same as the President's so assume that he's the one who
signed the modification. Is this a legal agreement? - ANS-Probably not. The elements of
a contract are - offer, acceptance, consideration, for a lawful purpose, certainty of terms,
and legal capacity. It is unlikely that a 17 year old summer hire would have the authority
to bind the company, regardless of her relationship to the Company President. Courts
may generally find that individuals lack "the age majority" if they are under 18 years of
age.
The law in a given jurisdiction may never actually use the term "age of majority" and the
term thereby refers to a collection of laws bestowing the status of adulthood. The age of
majority is a legally fixed age, concept, or statutory principle, which may differ
depending on the jurisdiction, and may not necessarily correspond to actual mental or
physical maturity of an individual.
In practical terms, there are certain specific actions which a person who attains the age
of majority is permitted to take, which they could not do before. These may include
entering into a binding contract, buying stocks, voting, buying and/or consuming
alcoholic beverages, driving motor vehicles on public roads, and marrying without
obtaining consent of others. The ages at which these various rights or powers may be
questions
You are the PCO for a major competitive negotiated source selection. The RFP, which
reflects the user's requirements and is based on the user's budget, has a requirement
for 220 cargo loaders to be delivered at 55 per year over the next four years. One
offeror proposes to deliver all 220 loaders in the first year at a dramatically reduced
price. Can you accept the offeror's proposal? What factors should you consider in your
decision? - ANS-You can accept the offeror's proposal under certain circumstances.
Firstly, what did the RFP say about alternate proposals? Is this a situation where
requirements are changed and the other offerors should be allowed to propose on the
basis of the changed requirements? You need to ask the user if he wants all 220 in the
first year and are the operating locations physically able to accommodate their loaders
in the first year. Finally, the offeror could be taken into discussions and asked to conform
to the RFP with there being the possibility of not being selected for award or elimination
from the competitive range if the proposal is not made compliant with the RFP.
You are the PCO on a new $2B aircraft development program. The program is in
contract negotiations for a Fixed Price Incentive (Firm Target) System Development and
Demonstration contract award to a sole source contractor. The program director, a
fast-burning young colonel, e-mails you that she is very concerned with the aircraft's
ultimate speed at the full specification payload. She would like the contractor to achieve
the faster, desired objective speed rather than the mandatory threshold speed, and
thinks that an objective performance incentive would be the way to go to achieve her
goal. You are asked to go to her office and discuss the matter and the issues involved in
using such an incentive. What do you tell the colonel? - ANS-There are a number of
considerations for the colonel:
The desired additional speed should provide benefit to the Government in order to
justify the expenditure of funds to achieve it. The colonel should be able to articulate the
justification.
The situation is very amenable to a classic performance incentive that would allow the
contractor to earn profit for achieving the desired speed above and beyond what the
final FPIF profit would be for achieving threshold speed. If the contractor perceives this
can't happen, he will either not sign up to the incentive or will ignore it from Day One.
,The incentive and resulting payment have to be structured so as to be based on
observable, measurable results that would determine how much is earned by the
contractor. Subjectivity is not allowable under current AF policy without HCA approval.
We have to be very careful to understand what possible unintended consequences
could be caused by the existence of this feature in the contract. For example, will the
contractor reduce aircraft weight beyond safe limits in order to help achieve the
payment? Also, will the contractor consume excessive schedule to get the extra speed?
There has to be a cost incentive in place so that the contractor doesn't spend an
unconstrained amount of money to win the payment, such as under a CPFF contract.
The FPIF share line serves this purpose when balanced against the incentive.
The incentive has to be balanced with the FPIF share line so that the contractor doesn't
spend more money to achieve the desired speed than he has potential to earn by
receiving the payment. Similarly, the contractor can't be allowed to spend an excessive
amount of money with little cost penalty to achieve success.
In some cases, Contracting Officers are also Grants Officers. They can award Grants
and Assistance Instruments as well as contracts. What is Assistance? How does it differ
from Acquisition? What gives the Grants Officers their authority to enter into assistance?
What are the types of Assistance? - ANS-When the principal purpose is to transfer a
thing of value, to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by law
of the United States, it is Assistance.
Acquisition, by contrast, has the principal purpose of acquiring property or services for
the direct benefit or use of the United States Government.
Federal agencies must be authorized by statute to support or stimulate a public
purpose. The statutory authority from Congress must exist either in broad legislation or
in a program-specific statute. Absent that statutory authority, a Grants Officer may not
use an assistance instrument.
Authorities to issue Assistance can be of three types: (1) Provide to the Secretary of
Defense by statute, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2391; (2) Authority provided to DoD components
that requires no delegation by the Secretary of Defense, e.g., 10 U.S.C. 2358; (3)
Authority coming indirectly from statutes, i.e., federal statute authorizing a program that
is consistent with using a grant or cooperative agreement.
Two types of Assistance are Grants and Cooperative Agreements. They differ in the
following way: In a Grant, substantial involvement is not expected between the agency
and the recipient. In Cooperative Agreement, substantial involvement is expected
between the agency and the recipient. Cooperative Agreements, then, are particularly
useful in the research arena when the Government is interested in being involved in
program decisions or may be doing some testing or research themselves.
,You are the Contracting Officer on a new Research and Development program.
Proposals were recently received in response to a Broad Agency Announcement, and a
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type is anticipated. The proposal most favored by the
technical team was priced significantly under what was estimated for the effort. The
contractor proposed fee in an amount that equates to 20% of the estimated cost. The
users have more than enough funds to cover the proposal and want you to accept the
price as is. How should you advise the user and what factors should you consider in
determining a reasonable fee? - ANS-The statutory limitation on fee for CPFF type
contracts do no permit exceeding 15% of estimated cost for experimental,
developmental, or research performed under a CPFF contract. Since the proposed
amount of fee is outside the statutory limitations you need to determine what a fair and
reasonable rate is that falls within the limitations. The FAR recommends a structured
approach for determining fee such as Weighted Guidelines. If a cost reasonableness
review determines the estimated costs to be acceptable, we can still negotiate and
adjust the fee.
You are the Contracting Officer for a well established transport aircraft program. The
program is nearing the end of production. A Program Manager approaches you
requesting that you issue a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) to support the
development of a source list to supply active noise reducing headsets. The headsets
are commercially available from multiple sources and the PM wants to receive
performance specification sheets from each offeror and then request sample headsets
be submitted for testing. The end result of the effort will be the development of a source
list that can be used by various government entities to individually procure the needed
headsets for their specific requirements. The PM tells you that he will not be procuring
any of the headsets as a result of the BAA. What do you advise the PM? - ANS-You
should advise the PM that BAAs are a method of solicitation and can only be used if the
Government intends to award a contract. You might suggest that the development of the
source list could be achieved by issuing a Sources Sought Synopsis with the synopsis
specifying the 2 step process (spec sheets first and then sample headsets from
selected offerors), and the ultimate intent of the process, e.g., a source list for use by
individual users in future procurements. You might also advise the PM that there could
be liability issues associated with the use, handling, and return of the headsets to the
offerors and that it might be appropriate for the Government to cover shipping and any
damage/wear to the units for the testing.
A. Under what circumstances is ratification of an unauthorized commitment permitted?
, B. In general, what are the generic procedures for handling ratification actions?
C. Who are the approval authorities for ratifications? - ANS-A. If the contract award
would have been proper if executed by a warranted PCO, the price can be determined
to be fair and reasonable, and there must have been enough of the proper type of
funding available to pay for the item both at the time of the commitment and at the time
of the ratification.
B. An investigation is required to be completed within 30 days of discovery of the
unauthorized commitment explaining how and why it occurred, how future occurrences
will be avoided, and describing any corrective actions taken against responsible
individuals. Legal review is also required.
C. The ratification approving official for all unauthorized commitments valued at or
above $1M is the SPE. The ratification approving official for all Non-DISA unauthorized
commitments (regardless of amount) and DISA unauthorized commitments valued
below $1M is the HCA. (DARS 1.602-3(b)(2))
You are the Contracting Officer for a much-delayed effort. On Friday you finally receive
the necessary authority to release the contract for signature. It's late on Friday afternoon
when you e-mail the modification to the contractor for signature. The only person at the
contractor's office on Friday afternoon is the Company President's 17 year old daughter
who is working there as a summer-hire secretary. She knows her father urgently wants
the contract modification so she signs the document and returns it to your office. You
note the last name is the same as the President's so assume that he's the one who
signed the modification. Is this a legal agreement? - ANS-Probably not. The elements of
a contract are - offer, acceptance, consideration, for a lawful purpose, certainty of terms,
and legal capacity. It is unlikely that a 17 year old summer hire would have the authority
to bind the company, regardless of her relationship to the Company President. Courts
may generally find that individuals lack "the age majority" if they are under 18 years of
age.
The law in a given jurisdiction may never actually use the term "age of majority" and the
term thereby refers to a collection of laws bestowing the status of adulthood. The age of
majority is a legally fixed age, concept, or statutory principle, which may differ
depending on the jurisdiction, and may not necessarily correspond to actual mental or
physical maturity of an individual.
In practical terms, there are certain specific actions which a person who attains the age
of majority is permitted to take, which they could not do before. These may include
entering into a binding contract, buying stocks, voting, buying and/or consuming
alcoholic beverages, driving motor vehicles on public roads, and marrying without
obtaining consent of others. The ages at which these various rights or powers may be
