1.) You are working as the contracting officer for a Department of Defense Agency and you receive a phone call from the president of Acme corp., a company that is in the final stages of a large contract for the supply of electronic components for a weapon system. To date the Contractor has performed very well and there has been no problems. The President is extremely angry and tells you that he is not going to deliver the final 1000 components (K called for delivery of 3000 components) because the economy is bad and that he is not happy with the contract price and he can make more dollars selling them to another agency or country. He tells you to simply terminate the contract for convenience. How would you resolve this under the FAR and explain your rationale?
2.) You just took over as a contracting officer and you were reviewing a memo of a subordinate contract specialist concerning a messed up contract. Please identify 5 issues that do not seem correct and briefly explain why they are not correct. "Dear Contracting officer: Two weeks ago I completed the Bid opening for the Widget Contract and awarded the contract the following week. This afternoon (two weeks later) one more bid came in the mail and I opened it and found it was the best so I plan to rescind the other contract award and award it to the company who submitted the late bid. The contract type for this sealed bid method of procurement was a cost reimbursement contract. I am also unsure if we have sufficient money to fund the contract? My wife and I also received a gift of two basketball tickets to a local NBA Team game from a different contractor but I don't work in that area of our office so I never have to consider their contracts for award, my co-worker handles those issues. Finally, on another contract, a contractor is not happy with the contract they were awarded because they are not making enough money, I am concerned they might file a protest against us to claim more money they believe that they are lawfully owed?
3.) You are recently hired as a contract specialist for a large Fortune 500 Company that makes weapon systems and drones for DOD Contracts. In a recent competition among 5 contractors for a drone contract you learned that your company lost out to Acme Corp. Your company scored and finished 2nd of the 5 companies competing. You have good information that Acme Corporation had a person working on the proposal who is the brother-in-law of the contracting officer. You have also become aware that the contracting officer has several Acme Corporation coffee mugs and routinely attends shows and exhibits funded by Acme and the KO always attends with his brother-in-law. Your boss asks you to brief him on the process to file a protest. Specifically address Where it can be filed? When (timeline)? What are some potential grounds for a protest? What are the potential remedies if your company wins?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 4:28 am ad1c9bdddf
1.) The termination for convenience is the Government's unilateral contractual right to terminate a contract without paying damages. (See T4C). This is an exercise of the government's right to completely or partially terminate performance of work under a contract when it is in the interest of the government. Now on the face of it, the situation is such that terminating the contract is not in the interest of the government. The fact that the President of Acme has phoned you means that terminating the contract is in the interest of Acme and not in the interest of the Department of Defense Agency.
According to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (Part 49) even though the government has wide latitude in terminating contracts for convenience, the contracting officer is allowed to do so only if the contracting officer has determined that it is in the interest of the government to do so. The procedure is that even when the contracting officer has determined that it is in the government's interest, according to the Federal Acquisition Regulation the contracting officer must consider alternatives in consultation with the customer, legal, and other interested parties. Since, there is an impact on the government and the contractor, the government policy is that a no-cost settlement in lieu of termination should be reached.
Now in case of Acme Corp. the claim made by the President is that the economy is bad and that he is not satisfied with the contract price. In this situation, it is in the government's interest to ensure that the balance 1,000 components also be delivered to the Department of Defense Agency. In such a situation the Federal Acquisition Regulation sets the ...
This response presents a brilliant discussion on Department of Defense Agency