Wouldn’t you like to know five things about size protests and appeals?
Click here to read the answers to these questions: http://smallgovcon.com/five-things/size-protests-and-appeals/
Businesses that seek to obtain and preserve contracts with the United States government, or to deal in certain enumerated defense articles and services, are subject to strict privacy regulations imposed by the U.S. government.
For those under contract (or subcontract) with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements (DFARS) place stringent minimum security requirements and reporting obligations that must be met, otherwise a business could face financial penalties or termination of its contract.
Businesses that export and import defense articles or services and related technical data must comply with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which comprise approval, registration and records maintenance requirements. If a violation of ITAR is voluntarily reported, the penalties imposed by the U.S. Department of State’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) can be reduced.
Businesses subject to DFARS and ITAR should have a compliance program in place that includes an appropriate response to any security incident.
Keep reading this article at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d5fda8c7-68e4-4a1c-a4f5-7e387e51741d
As the incumbent contractor, you’re excited to bid on the successor contract. The day it’s posted, you dash to fbo.gov, pull up the solicitation, and breathe a sigh of relief: the contract is still exclusively a small business set-aside.
But wait! Under the assigned NAICS code your business doesn’t fall below the size standard.
Can the agency change the NAICS code from one iteration of the contract to another? Sure, so long as the selected NAICS code meets the regulatory standard.
In NAICS Appeal of STG, Inc., SBA No. NAICS-5936 (2018), OHA considered a solicitation, issued by the Department of the Army, for “[n]on-personal information technology (IT) services and support requirements.” The contracting officer assigned the procurement NAICS code 541513, Computer Facilities Management Services, which carries a $27.5 million size standard. STG, the incumbent contractor, disagreed with that selection. It contended that the NAICS code, assigned to the existing contract, was the correct one, namely NAICS code, 517110 (now NAICS code 517311), Wired Telecommunications Carriers, with a 1,500-employee size standard.
Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/uncategorized/yes-an-agency-can-change-the-naics-code-from-one-iteration-of-a-contract-to-the-next/
Despite a longstanding and very common misconception, the VA’s SDVOSB verification requirement doesn’t apply to non-VA SDVOSB contracts.
As the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals recently reiterated, it was “simply not correct” to believe that a company was required to be verified in VetBiz to be awarded a non-VA SDVOSB contract.
Confusingly, the federal government currently runs two SDVOSB programs: one under the VA’s rules and the other under the SBA’s.
Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/service-disabled-veteran-owned-small-businesses/vetbiz-verification-not-required-for-non-va-sdvosb-contracts-sba-oha-reiterates/
In an effort to help construction contractors comply with its new Respirable Crystalline Silica Standard for Construction, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) has released instructional videos and other free educational materials about the topic.
Some of the aids provided by the agency, Safety + Health reported, are a customizable slideshow presentation to help employers train construction workers; a short YouTube video about how to protect employees from silica dust; a video series on dust control methods for common construction tasks; and a website with answers to frequently asked questions.
The rule went into effect for the construction industry on Sept. 23, 2017, but OSHA delayed full enforcement by a month to Oct. 23, 2017, giving employers more time to comply and the agency more time to develop detailed enforcement guidelines.
The deadline for laboratory evaluation of exposure samples started on June 23, 2018.
Keep reading this article at: https://www.constructiondive.com/news/osha-releases-free-silica-compliance-tools-for-contractors/530864/
After spending 30 years in the software business, Greg Mills was seeking a new challenge. That’s why two years ago, he acquired a brass and metal-fixtures manufacturer near Phoenix and renamed it M3 metals. He’s spent the majority of that time seeking ways to modernize and streamline the company, so it can find new customers in the increasingly competitive construction industry.
He isn’t alone. In fact, 34 percent of construction companies said their biggest challenge in their first through fourth years in business was finding new customers, according to a Kabbage® study. That’s more than the 30 percent combined who said they were most concerned with managing cash flow, dealing with regulations, and finding and retaining employees.
Keep reading this article at: https://www.constructiondive.com/news/5-tips-for-making-winning-bids/530192/
Construction contract disputes across the world are getting longer, more complex and more expensive, according to the “Global Construction Disputes Report 2018” from design and consultancy firm Arcadis.
The value of North American disputes — or total costs added to a project for the additional work being claimed — dropped for a fourth consecutive year to $19 million in 2017, compared with the $43 million global average, the report found. Meanwhile, the average length of North American disputes increased from 15.6 months in 2016 to 17.7 months last year, exceeding the global average of 14.8 months.
Contract errors and/or omissions were the top cause of disputes in North America last year, followed by poor contract administration, which was trailed by failure on the part of an owner, contractor or subcontractor to understand or comply with contractual obligations.
Social infrastructure and the public sector collectively saw the most disputes while the transportation sector saw the second most.
Keep reading this article at: https://www.constructiondive.com/news/report-contract-disputes-are-getting-longer-more-complex/527970/
Ready or not — federal agencies are increasingly utilizing “other transactions authority” (OTA) to craft agreements that are not subject to traditional procurement laws and therefore should, in theory, allow the government greater access to innovative solutions.
While the goal of OTA procedures may be to avoid bottlenecks inherent in procurement under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, in the end they may result in valuable contracts with the government. As with any such contracts, it is inevitable that disputes will arise during their formation and administration.
While there is very little precedent relating to protests of OTA awards or claims arising under OTA-awarded contracts, there are some fundamental principles and analogous decisions that suggest how this early history of OTA protests and claims may unfold.
This article attempts to portray the current landscape for protests of OTA awards and contract claims arising during performance of an OTA agreement.
Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=721778
Unless an agency designates different business hours, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) says that a government agency is deemed to close at 4:30 p.m. local time–not 5:00 p.m., as it would be easy to assume.
In a recent case, the 4:30 p.m. closing time cost an unsuccessful offeror a chance at a GAO protest because the offeror’s debriefing request, sent to the agency at 4:59 p.m., was deemed untimely.
The GAO’s decision in Exceptional Software Strategies, Inc., B-416232 (July 12, 2018) involved an NSA solicitation seeking to award up to six IDIQ contracts for the definition, prototyping, development, and production of visualization and presentation tools. Thirteen offerors, including Exceptional Software Strategies, Inc., submitted initial proposals.
The evaluation panel determined that ESS’s proposal was unacceptable under one of the non-price factors. On Thursday, March 15, 2018, NSA informed ESS that its proposal had been excluded from the competitive range. The letter explained that ESS had been found unacceptable, and the reasons why.
Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/gaobidprotests/gao-agency-closing-time-is-430-p-m-not-500-p-m/
Every unit of government has rules about how it purchases goods and services. As a vendor, your success in doing business with government agencies is dependent upon your knowledge of those rules.
The federal government follows the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and many federal agencies also issue FAR supplements. Similarly, each state government has its own purchasing procedures.
In the State of Georgia, the Department of Administrative Services, through its State Purchasing Division (SPD), maintains the Georgia Procurement Manual (GPM). The GPM governs how state government entities purchase needed goods and supplies. It also provides information to suppliers about how to conduct business with the State of Georgia. SPD periodically revises the GPM to incorporate legislative changes, new automated processes and best practices.
In May of this year, the GPM was updated in several important ways, including the supplier protest process as well as internal procedural updates, such as new automated processes for state procurement staff to submit certain reports and requests to SPD. You can see a summary of the changes here. A brief overview of the new supplier protest process follows.
GPM Section 6.5 defines how suppliers may challenge certain purchasing actions by state entities, such as: solicitations, proposed sole source contracts, proposed purchases through consortia or cooperative purchasing agreements, the results of a Request for Qualified Contractors and the state’s proposed or actual award of a contract.
SPD has updated the supplier protest process to:
Changes became effective May 18, 2018. You can listen to a recorded webinar on the changes to the Georgia Procurement Manual here: GPM changes. (Presentation begins at the 9:55 mark.)
