WebMar 22, 2024 · 212.209. Determination of price reasonableness. (a) In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3453 (d), agencies shall conduct or obtain market research to support the determination of the reasonableness of price for commercial products and commercial … (1) For guidance on using the Exclusion section of the System for Award … WebSep 16, 2015 · The newly proposed rule (DFARS Case 2013–D034) implements section 831 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. When …
DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and Information - Under …
WebAug 11, 2016 · DFARS 215.402, Pricing policy, is amended to provide information regarding the contracting officer's responsibility for determining if the information provided by the offeror is sufficient to determine price reasonableness. 6. DFARS 215.403-1, Prohibition on obtaining certified cost or pricing data (10 U.S.C. 2306a and 41 U.S.C. chapter 35), is ... WebMay 17, 2024 · The main difference between the final DFARS rule from 2024 and the new FAR rule is that the DFARS rule imposes certain per se prohibitions on the use of the LPTA procurement method, whereas the new FAR rule does not. In particular, DFARS 215.101-2-70 (b) imposes a per se prohibition on the use of the LPTA method for procurements of: bis 2 2 2-trifluoroethyl oxalate
DAU Acquipedia: Fair and Reasonable Price Determination
WebDFARS 252.215-7010 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or ... data” means information provided by an offeror on sales of the same … WebAug 12, 2015 · The Department of Defense (DOD) is taking several steps to develop guidance and training related to determining the reasonableness of prices. First, DOD issued a policy memo to provide guidance to contracting officers on the determination of price reasonableness for commercial items. Second, DOD plans to revise the … WebJan 23, 2024 · The contracting officer involved in the actions admitted that this was an oversight. CEHNC contracting personnel relied on price reasonableness determinations that were not approved until after the award of 4, valued at $1.76 million, of the 33 orders. Again, the contracting officer stated that this was an oversight. bis 2- 2′-bromoisobutyryloxy ethyl disulfide