Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Training
    • Class Registration
    • On-demand Training
  • Useful Links
  • Team Directory
    • Albany Counselor
    • Atlanta Counselors
    • Augusta Counselor
    • Carrollton Counselor
    • Columbus Counselor
    • Gainesville Counselor
    • Savannah Counselor
    • Warner Robins Counselor
  • Directions
    • Atlanta – Training Facility
    • Atlanta – Office
    • Albany
    • Augusta
    • Carrollton
    • Columbus
    • Gainesville
    • Savannah
    • Warner Robins
  • New Client Application
  • Contact Us

FAR update clarifies interagency contracting responsibilities

December 21, 2010 By ei2admin

Anytime the Defense Department hires another federal agency to do procurements for it, those servicing agencies are now responsible in regulation for ensuring that the General Services Administration schedule orders they place on behalf of the DoD comply with Defense regulations.

The new regulation–part of an interim rule made effective Dec. 13 and so subject to change (although, if past experience is anything to go by, minor changes)–settles an argument among federal agencies about how far regulations from the original customer agency penetrate past the level of another federal agency hired to perform procurement services. The answer is all the way.

The rule, in fact, applies to the entire government, but the Defense Department is the federal agency with the most involved set of department-specific regulations and so generally the most likely to have a difference from federalwide regulations. The new rule specifically states that the contracting officer placing the order is responsible for applying the regulatory and statutory requirements of the agency for which the order is being placed. The same goes when establishing a GSA blanket purchase agreement. The new language is part of a revised Part 8.404 (b)(1) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation

Many federal agencies, the Defense Department included, hire agencies such as GSA or the Interior Department’s Acquisition Services Directorate to perform procurements for them, paying them a fee for their services. The Pentagon a few years ago grew highly strained in its relationship with GSA and Interior in part over the extent to which those agencies were applying DoD rules to procurements made on its behalf.

All agencies that utilize an interagency procurement vehicle–including GSA schedules, although only for orders worth more than $500,000–must also now make a determination that use of another agency’s contract is the “best procurement approach.” That means at a minimum a document that analyzes the suitability of the contract vehicle and the value of utilizing it. Also from now on, any agency utilizing the services of another agency to make procurements (except, apparently, for assisted acquisitions made through GSA schedules that are worth less than $500,000) must have in place a written interagency agreement governing roles and responsibilities before the servicing agency releases a solicitation on behalf of its customer agency. These changes are all found in the new FAR Part 17.502-1 .

The interim rule also requires any agency setting up a new multi-agency contract vehicle with payment between agencies governed by the Economy Act to put together a business case analysis, although the rule’s language doesn’t appear to require that business case to gain approval from any higher authority before it proceeds with the new vehicle.   

The rule does say that the agency should consider strategies for small business participation; analyze all the direct and indirect costs to the government for administering such a contract; describe the impact the vehicle will have on governmentwide purchasing power; analyze whether there “is a need” for establishing the multi-agency contract and, finally, document roles and responsibilities in contract administration. That new language can be found in FAR Part 17.502-2 .

Multi-agency contracts have come under some criticism in the past few years for diluting the ability of the government to concentrate its purchasing power. An August 26, 2010 report  (.pdf) from the Office of Procurement Policy found that while during fiscal 2009 interagency contracting amounted to $53 billion worth of procurements, multi-agency contracts accounted for about $3 billion of that, or almost 6 percent.

Orders through GSA schedules totaled about $37 billion, orders through the Department of Veterans Affairs administered schedules totaled about $9 billion, and orders through governmentwide acquisition contracts (which are statutorily different from multi-agency contracts) accounted for about $3 billion.

Comments about the interim rule are due by Feb. 11, 2011.

For more:

  • download the interim rule (.pdf)
  • or go to the Federal Register interim rule webpage.

— by David Perera – Dec. 15, 2010 – Fierce Government – Source URL:
http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/far-update-clarifies-interagency-contracting-responsibilities/2010-12-15

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: blanket purchase orders, DoD, GSA, multi-agency contracts, Schedules

Recent Posts

  • Contractors must update EEO poster
  • SBA scorecard shows federal government continues to prioritize small business contracting
  • The risk of organizational conflicts of interest
  • The gap widens between COFC and GAO on late is late rule
  • OMB releases guidance related to small business goals

Popular Topics

8(a) abuse Army bid protest budget budget cuts certification construction contract awards contracting opportunities cybersecurity DoD DOJ False Claims Act FAR federal contracting federal contracts fraud GAO Georgia Tech government contracting government contract training government trends GSA GSA Schedule GTPAC HUBZone innovation IT Justice Dept. marketing NDAA OMB SBA SDVOSB set-aside small business small business goals spending subcontracting technology VA veteran owned business VOSB wosb

Contracting News

SBA scorecard shows federal government continues to prioritize small business contracting

OMB releases guidance related to small business goals

OMB issues guidance on impact of injunction on government contractor vaccine mandate

Changes coming to DOD’s Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification under CMMC 2.0

Judge issues nationwide injunction halting enforcement of COVID-19 vaccine mandate

Read More

Contracting Tips

Contractors must update EEO poster

The risk of organizational conflicts of interest

The gap widens between COFC and GAO on late is late rule

Are verbal agreements good enough for government contractors?

CMMC 2.0 simplifies requirements but raises risks for government contractors

Read More

GTPAC News

VA direct access program events in 2022

Sandia National Laboratories seeks small business suppliers

Navy OSBP hosting DCAA overview (part 2) event Jan. 12, 2022

Navy OSBP hosting cybersecurity “ask me anything” event Dec. 16th

State of Georgia hosting supplier systems training on January 26, 2022

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Undergraduate enrollment growth reflects inclusive excellence

Georgia Tech delivers $4 billion in economic impact to the State of Georgia

Georgia Tech awards first round of seed grants to support team-based research

Georgia Tech announces inaugural Associate Vice President of Corporate Engagement

DoD funds Georgia Tech to enhance U.S. hypersonics capabilities

Read More

  • SAM.gov registration is free, and help with SAM is free, too
APTAC RSS Twitter GTPAC - 30th Year of Service

Copyright © 2023 · Georgia Tech - Enterprise Innovation Institute