« PreviousContinue »
(2) If it can be established that the conditions stated in FAR 33.105(d)(1)(i) and (ii) are present, the contracting officer shall prepare a D&F setting forth the circumstances. The D&F shall be concurred in by the cognizant OGCBAL attorney before being executed by the PORA (not delegable).
(g) If an appeal is to be made by the Department regarding a final decision issued by the GSBCA, it shall be made by OGC-BAL.
[50 FR 23133, May 31, 1985, as amended at 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985; 56 FR 47003, Sept. 17, 1991]
333.106 Solicitation provision and contract clause.
(a) The provision at FAR 52.233–2, Service of Protest, shall be completed by entering the name and complete mailing address of the contracting offi
[50 FR 23133, May 31, 1985, as amended at 50 FR 38004, Sept. 19, 1985]
Subpart 333.2-Disputes and Appeals
SOURCE: 53 FR 15563, May 2, 1988, unless otherwise noted.
(c) The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) has been designated by the Secretary as the authorized "Board" to hear and determine disputes for the Department.
333.209 Suspected fraudulent claims.
The contracting officer shall submit any instance of a contractor's suspected fraudulent claim to the Office of the Inspector General for investigation.
333.210 Contracting officer's authority.
The contracting officer shall refer a proposed final decision to the Office of General Counsel, Business and Administrative Law Division (OGC-BAL), or the Regional Attorney in the HHS regional office servicing the region in which the contracting officer is located, for advice as to the legal sufficiency and format before sending the final decision to the contractor. The
contracting officer shall provide OGCBAL or the Regional Attorney with the pertinent documents with the submission of each proposed final decision.
333.211 Contracting officer's decision.
(a)(2) See 333.210.
(a)(4)(v) When using the paragraph in FAR 33.211(a)(4)(v), the contracting officer shall insert the words "Armed Services" before each mention of the term "Board of Contract Appeals”.
(c)(2) The contracting officer does not have jurisdiction to consider a claim from the contractor over $50,000, unless that claim has been certified.
(h) At any time within the period of appeal, the contracting officer may modify or withdraw his/her final decision. If an appeal from the final decision has been taken to the ASBCA, the contracting officer will forward his/her recommended action to OGC-BAL or the cognizant Regional Attorney with the supplement to the contract file which supports the recommended correction or amendment.
(3) All correspondence between the parties pertinent to the appeal, including the letter or letters of claims in response to which the decision was issued;
(4) Transcripts of any testimony taken during the course of proceedings, and affidavits or statements of any witnesses on the matter in dispute made prior to the filing of the notice of appeal with the Board; and
(5) Any additional information considered pertinent.
The contracting officer shall furnish the appeal file to the Government Trial Attorney for review and approval. After approval, the contracting officer shall prepare four copies of the file, one for the ASBCA, one for the appellant, one for the Government Trial Attorney, and one for the contracting office.
(d) At all times after the filing of an appeal, the contracting officer shall render whatever assistance is requested by the Government Trial Attorney. When an appeal is set for hearing, the concerned contracting officer, acting under the guidance of the Government Trial Attorney, shall be responsible for arranging for the presence of Government witnesses and specified physical and documentary evidence at both the pre-hearing conference and the hearing.
(e) If a contractor which has filed an appeal with the ASBCA elects to accept fully the decision from which the appeal was taken, or any modification to it, and gives written notification of acceptance to the Government Trial Attorney or the concerned contracting officer, the Government Trial Attorney will notify the ASBCA of the disposition of the dispute in accordance with Rule 27 of the ASBCA.
(f) If the contractor has elected to appeal to the U.S. Claims Court, the U.S. Department of Justice will represent the Department. However, the contracting officer shall still coordinate all actions through OGC-BAL.
(a) The following format is suggested for use in transmitting appeal files to the ASBCA:
Recorder, Armed Services Board of Contracts Appeals, Skyline Six, 5109 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Virginia 22041.
Contracting Officer Enclosures
Transmitted herewith are documents relative to the appeal under Contract No. with the (name of contractor), in accordance with the procedures under Rule 4. The Government Trial Attorney for this case is (Insert Division of Business and Administrative Law, Office of General Counsel, Department of Health and Human Services, 330 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201, or Regional Attorney and office address, as appropriate).
The request for payment of charges resulting from the processing of this appeal should be addressed to: (Insert name and address of cognizant finance office.)
use from the Director, Division of Acquisition Policy (through normal acquisition channels).
[53 FR 15563, May 2, 1988, as amended at 54 FR 24344, June 7, 1989]
The clause at FAR 52.233-1 shall be used in all circumstances except as indicated in 333.213.
SUBCHAPTER F-SPECIAL CATEGORIES OF CONTRACTING
PART 334-MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION
AUTHORITY: 5 U.S.C. 301; 40 U.S.C. 486(c). 334.003 Agency head responsibilities.
The Department's implementation of OMB Circular No. A-109 may be found in Chapter 1-150 of the General Administration Manual.
[49 FR 14020, Apr. 9, 1984]
PART 335-RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING
335.070-2 Amount of cost-sharing. Method of cost-sharing. 335.070-4 Institutional cost-sharing agreements.
335.070-5 Contract clauses.
AUTHORITY: 5 U.S.C. 301; 40 U.S.C. 486(c).
SOURCE: 49 FR 14020, Apr. 9, 1984, unless otherwise noted.
(a) In addition to utilizing cost-sharing type contracts when required by statute, the desirability of utilizing this type of contract, when authorized should also be considered under certain circumstances when not required by statute. Contractors should be encouraged to contribute to the cost of performing research where there is a probability that the contractor will receive present or future benefits from participation, such as, increased technical know-how, training to employees, acquisition of equipment, use of background knowledge in future contracts, etc. Cost-sharing is intended to serve the mutual interest of the Government and the performing organization by helping to assure efficient utilization of the resources available for the conduct of research projects and by promoting sound planning and prudent fiscal policies by the performing organization. If cost-sharing is not required
by statute, encouragement should be given to organizations to contribute to the cost of performing research under research contracts unless the contracting officer determines that a request for cost-sharing would not be appropriate because of the following circumstances:
(1) The particular research objective or scope of effort for the project is specified by the Government rather than proposed by the performing organization. This would usually include any formal Government requests for proposals for a specific project.
(2) The research effort has only minor relevance to the non-Federal activities of the performing organization, and the organization is proposing to undertake the research primarily as a service to the Government.
(3) The organization has little or no non-Federal sources or funds from which to make a cost contribution. Cost-sharing should generally not be requested if cost-sharing would require the Government to provide funds through some other means (such as fees) to enable the organization to cost-share. It should be recognized that those organizations which are predominantly engaged in research and development and have little or no production or other service activities may not be in a favorable position to make a cost contribution.
(b) Cost-sharing may be negotiated in either of two ways. When cost-sharing is negotiated on a contract by contract basis, the responsibility for negotiating the cost-sharing arrangement is that of the contracting officer. In the case of institutional cost-sharing arrangements (see 335.070-4), the responsibility for negotiating cost-sharing is that of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health. Each research contract file should show whether the contracting officer considered cost-sharing appropriate for that particular contract and, except when an institutional cost-sharing agreement is applicable, in what amount. If cost-sharing was not considered appropriate, the file must indicate the factual basis for that decision, e.g., "Because the contractor will derive no
benefits from this award that can be applied to its commercial activities, cost-sharing is not considered appropriate." The contracting officer may wish to coordinate with the project officer before documenting this decision.
(c) If the contracting officer considers cost-sharing to be appropriate for a research contract and the contractor refuses to accept this type of contract, the award may be made without costsharing, except when cost-sharing is required by statute, if the contracting officer concludes that payment of the full cost of the research effort is necessary in order to obtain the services of that particular contractor.
[49 FR 14020, Apr. 9, 1984; 49 FR 36110, Sept. 14, 1984]
335.070-2 Amount of cost-sharing.
When cost-sharing is required by statute or determined to be appropriate, the following guidelines shall be utilized in determining the amount of cost participation by the contractor, except where an institutional costsharing agreement is applicable:
(a) Cost participation by educational institutions and other not-for-profit or nonprofit organizations should mally be at least 1 percent of the total project cost. In many cases, cost-sharing of less than 5 percent of the total project cost would be appropriate in view of the organizations' nonprofit status and their normally limited ability to recover the cost of such participation from non-Federal sources. However, in some cases, it may be appropriate for educational institutions to provide a higher degree of cost-sharing, such as when the cost of the research consists primarily of the academic year salary of faculty members (or when the equipment acquired by the institution for the project will be of significant value to the institution in its educational activities). The percentages stated above are not intended as a substitution for those set forth in any legislation and are not to be used in lieu of those contained in that legislation.
(b) The amount of cost participation by commercial or industrial organizations should depend to a large extent on whether the research effort or results are likely to enhance the per
forming organization's capability, expertise, or competitive position, and the value of such enhancement to the performing organization. It should be recognized that those organizations which are predominantly engaged in research and development and have little or no production or other service activities may not be in a favorable position to derive a monetary benefit from their research under Federal agreements. Therefore, cost participation by commercial or industrial organizations could reasonably range from as little as 1 percent or less of the total project cost, to more than 50 percent of the total project cost.
(c) If the performing organization will not acquire title to or the right to use inventions, patents, or technical information resulting from the research project, it would generally be appropriate to obtain less cost-sharing than in cases in which the performer acquires such rights.
(d) When cost-sharing is required by statute, cost participation of less than 1 percent may be appropriate if consistent with the provisions of the statute, and:
(1) A formal request for proposal is issued;
(2) The contractor proposes to perform the research primarily as a service to the Government; or
(e) The contractor has little or no non-Federal sources of funds from which to make a cost contribution.
(3) A fee or profit will usually not be paid to the performing organization if the organization is to contribute to the cost of the research effort, but the amount of cost-sharing may be reduced to reflect the fact that the organization is foregoing its normal fee or profit in the research. However, if the research is expected to be of only minor value to the performing organization and if cost-sharing is not required by statute, it may be appropriate for the performer to make a contribution in the form of a reduced fee or profit rather than sharing the costs of the project.
(f) The organization's participation may be considered over the total term of the project so that a relatively high contribution in one year may be offset