Biased Ground Rules OCI for sole-source?

FAR 9.505-2, covering the "Biased ground rules" OCI, prevents a contractor from supplying the services or items on a contract in which they assisted in developing the specifications or statement of work in a "competitive acquisition." I have two questions:

1. ...[not addressed in this response]

2. For DOD acquisition, is there any other ethics restriction on a contractor providing input to a statement of work for a contract which the Government intends to award directly to that contractor through the 8(a) sole-source process? I believe that once the competitive aspect is removed from the scenario, it simply becomes a matter of negotiation between the contractor and the Government.

For construction contracts or for design-build construction contracts where the firm prepared the design criteria, see FAR 36.209.

2. For DOD acquisition, is there any other ethics restriction on a contractor providing input to a statement of work for a contract which the Government intends to award directly to that contractor through the 8(a) sole-source process? I believe that once the competitive aspect is removed from the scenario, it simply becomes a matter of negotiation between the contractor and the Government.

Is the 8(a) under seperate contract with the program office to help with development of the requirements, or have you already set-aside for the 8(a) and you are now just negotiating parts of the SOW that they don't necessarily agree with? That's a big distinction you need to make. I think if it is the prior, which it sounds like you are implying, I'm not sure how that isn't a potential OCI issue. Even if you want to use the technicality of the word competitive being in there, it is certainly an implied confict of interest.

... I believe that once the competitive aspect is removed from the scenario, it simply becomes a matter of negotiation between the contractor and the Government.

I agree based on what you've provided. I don't see this as an OCI issue.

DCarver, in the situation which I'm considering, there is no separate contract (with the same contractor or otherwise) to develop the requirements for the contract at issue. The contractor provides substantial input to the Government customer who develops the Statement of Work, and the contract is then awarded to the same contractor as a sole-source through the 8(a) program. Stipulate that the Government acted properly in awarding the contract via 8(a) sole-source rather than through competition. My understanding is that, absent competition requirements, the Government is free to seek whatever input it wishes from an 8(a) contractor it is negotiating with on a sole-source basis, and incorporate that input into the awarded contract. Is that your understanding?

It sounds like your scenario, as you just described, was point #2 of my post. You're just negotiating the finer points of the SOW, not actively developing the SOW in conjunction with the program office. I don't think that is an issue; you should always try to negotiate the contract/requirements so that it is most advantageous for your company.