Opinion ID: 199955
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Federal Acquisition Regulations

Text: 11 In the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 (Act), Congress created the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (Office) to exercise responsibility for, and oversight of, the procurement of property and services 3 for the federal government. 41 U.S.C. § 404 (1987 & Supp.2001). To the administrator of the Office (Administrator), Congress granted the discretion to prescribe reasonable rules and regulations governing the procurement of property and services by an executive agency, including departments of the military. Id. §§ 403, 404. The goal of the Act is to obtain maximum efficiency in the expenditure of public resources. 12 To implement a uniform procurement system, the Administrator has promulgated a set of rules and regulations, the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), 48 C.F.R. § 1 et seq. (2001), that broadly outline procurement policies and procedures for the acquisition of goods and services by the government on behalf of the American taxpayer. It grants broad discretion to local procurement officials to take independent actions based on their professional judgment so as to obtain the best value product or service. Id. §§ 1.102, 1.102-2(c)(2). Best value is viewed from a broad perspective and is achieved by balancing the many competing interests in a system that promotes efficiency and the maximization of resources. Id. § 1.102-1(b). To achieve efficient operations, the FAR shifts its focus from `risk avoidance' to one of `risk management.' Id. § 1.102-2(c)(2). The FAR views the cost to the taxpayer of attempting to eliminate all risk as prohibitive. To avoid these costs, the FAR encourages the broad use of discretion. It explicitly states that [t]he Executive Branch will accept and manage risk associated with empowering local procurement officials to take independent action based on their professional judgment. Id. 13 Congress provided guiding principles concerning the retention of contractors like ASI by the Navy. Id. §§ 9.104-1, 9.104-3. Pursuant to both the statute and the FAR, some of the factors to be considered include whether the prospective contractor has adequate financial resources; the ability to comply with delivery and performance schedule; a satisfactory performance record; and a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics. 41 U.S.C. § 403(7)(Supp.2001); 48 C.F.R. § 9.104-1(a)-(d). Safety considerations are mentioned within the broad category of having the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or ability to obtain them (including, as appropriate, such elements as ... safety programs applicable to materials to be produced or services to be performed....). 48 C.F.R. § 9.104-1(e). Thus, in this case, the Navy was to consider a variety of factors — safety programs among them — when it evaluated bids and selected a contractor. 14 In regards to safety issues, the FAR mandates that certain provisions be placed in the contract; these delegate primary responsibility to the contractor to maintain a safe work environment. Id. § 36.513. According to the required contract clauses, the contractor must comply with all federal safety laws and regulations, id. § 52.236-13(b)(2), must follow the pertinent provisions of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual, id. § 52.236-13(c), and must ensure that any additional safety measures required by the contracting officer are taken, id. § 52.236-13(b)(2). In addition, if the contract involves hazardous work or materials, the contractor is required to submit a written plan that must include analysis of the significant hazards of life, limb, and property inherent in contract work performance and a plan for controlling these hazards. Id. § 52.236-13(f)(1). 15 While the FAR gives primary responsibility for safety to the contractor, the contracting officer is required to notify the contractor of any instances, coming to the officer's attention, of noncompliance with these requirements or any condition which poses a serious threat or imminent danger to the health or safety of the public or Government personnel. Id. § 52.236-13(d). If, upon notification, the contractor refuses to take corrective action the contracting officer has the option to stop work until satisfactory corrective action is taken. Id. The contracting officer is also required to contact OSHA of instances where the contractor has been notified to take immediate action to correct serious or imminent dangers. Id. § 36.513(c). 16 The FAR prescribes broad oversight obligations for the Navy. Specifically, [c]ontracting officers are responsible for ensuring performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensuring compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguarding the interests of the United States ... In order to perform these responsibilities, contracting officers should be allowed wide latitude to exercise business judgment. Id. § 1.602-2. Thus, the FAR explicitly provides a contracting officer with discretion in determining the manner in which the officer will conduct oversight responsibilities.