Laptops issued to a contractor

ASPR threshold is $5,000 unit price.  Unless these are very expensive laptops, the answer is no.

This is an area where I think we shoot ourselves in the foot, so to speak.  

We should provide Government property to the contractor -- then, the contractor is responsible for tracking it.  When the Government foolishly (my opinion) hand receipts property directly to a contractor employee, are we subverting/avoiding all of the Government property clauses in the contract?  

We should provide Government property to the contractor, not to the contractor employee (my opinion).

formerfed said:

ASPR threshold is $5,000 unit price.  Unless these are very expensive laptops, the answer is no.

at a minimum an dd-1149 should be issued

ji20874 said:

This is an area where I think we shoot ourselves in the foot, so to speak.  

We should provide Government property to the contractor -- then, the contractor is responsible for tracking it.  When the Government foolishly (my opinion) hand receipts property directly to a contractor employee, are we subverting/avoiding all of the Government property clauses in the contract?  

We should provide Government property to the contractor, not to the contractor employee (my opinion).

i agree with you and thats what i think happened in this situation, i believe that the supervisor had "hand receipted" the laptops to the contractor employees. at a  minmimum a dd-1149 should have been used to issue the laptops to the contractor. as another comment indicated depending on the value of the laptops would determine if they need to be entered into an APSR...

In this scenario, would the contractor be required to have an approved Property Management System IAW 252.245-7003?

If so, should that have been an evaluation factor (or maybe a responsibility factor) in the original competition for award?

If the contractor is required to develop an adequate System in order to properly track government-issued laptops, and assuming there is no other contract that requires an adequate tracking system, would the CO be willing to pay for that effort as a direct contract cost?

Bottom-line is that telling the contractor to track the laptops carries with that direction the possibility that there will be an increased cost of performance. I would hope the IGCE included that "hidden" cost in its estimate.

formerfed said:

ASPR threshold is $5,000 unit price.

ASPR?

Vern Edwards said:

ASPR?

APSR.  A slip going back to my intern days and early DoD experience.  🙄

Vern Edwards said:

ASPR?

typo - good laugh

Dave T said:

typo - good laugh

In related news, I have a copy of the ASPR Manual for Contract Pricing, dated 1975, that's available if somebody wants it. I've had it for years, and never once used it. Message me if interested.

here_2_help said:

In related news, I have a copy of the ASPR Manual for Contract Pricing, dated 1975, that's available if somebody wants it. I've had it for years, and never once used it. Message me if interested.

It's available for download in pdf at:

[Dead link removed.]

Vern Edwards said:

It's available for download in pdf at:

https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5Qac61IuUMG4P1X5FIC799cOZWRKiOfKRMdiZmhDYC3AaqkomXVxHlUG9t5tnckNEXNI3SmlGmFALzJUHgehgElq7EvCv1Ii_Ym7pP80jVuKohkJ-ItoEw-usxTLk1UDfMtZMxMmDAWKqF9mS_O9V5V6CgSfeWwvs1NWG63se-TmKLH1P4pII5lV9-q2Hfxeik557f0M6iWznvtxZOXUYF6aeijHfiOcY4_M7Ji35znnUhxMfX4_8vXB5Cv7nOub58gdYmcvjgpm4y1zjJbSQ3t10EqT40-8E6EkbmPVRh9gRexb42n8

Sure, but my copy is suitable for putting on a bookshelf in a CMO

here_2_help said:

In related news, I have a copy of the ASPR Manual for Contract Pricing, dated 1975, that's available if somebody wants it. I've had it for years, and never once used it. Message me if interested.

Is your copy a yellow paperback book? Mine is.

I wasn’t able to open the link (on my iPhone):

“403. That’s an error.

Your client does not have permission to get URL /books/content?req=AKW5Qac61IuUMG4P1X5FIC799cOZWRKiOfKRMdiZmhDYC3AaqkomXVxHlUG9t5tnckNEXNI3SmlGmFALzJUHgehgElq7EvCv1Ii_Ym7pP80jVuKohkJ-ItoEw-usxTLk1UDfMtZMxMmDAWKqF9mS_O9V5V6CgSfeWwvs1NWG63se-TmKLH1P4pII5lV9-q2Hfxeik557f0M6iWznvtxZOXUYF6aeijHfiOcY4_M7Ji35znnUhxMfX4_8vXB5Cv7nOub58gdYmcvjgpm4y1zjJbSQ3t10EqT40-8E6EkbmPVRh9gRexb42n8 from this server.  That’s all we know.”

joel hoffman said:

Is your copy a yellow paperback book? Mine is.

Yep

Mine was just like this one  "red" but this is 1969 and 1986.  

ASPM #1. 1969

ASPM 1986

I think I read the 1986 version the most, especially Chapter 8.  I always liked this one under "Gamesmanship."

"The Here It Is Friday Afternoon and You've Got to Catch the Plane Squeeze"

OK, back to the topic.

joel hoffman said:

I wasn’t able to open the link (on my iPhone):

Yeah. Something goes wrong when I try to copy the link.

Go to Google Books and search for Armed Services Procurement Regulation Manual for Contract Pricing 1975 and scroll until you reach a downloadable version. The 1969 and 1986 versions are also available at Google Books.

They are still good reference works.

Dave T said:

laptops are issued to the contractor.

Dave T said:

given to the contractors to use.

Dave T said:

The laptops are used for official business

Dave T said:

i don't believe the contractor even knows how many they have

Dave T said:

know that my fellow COR will have to issue a dd-1149 but do these laptops need to go into a APSR?

Alternative #1 - Oh what the heck tell your other COR not to worry, after all the leaders of Forum think it is a trivial matter and are hung up on ASPR and where to find it.  No big deal that some contractor employees are running around with official government laptops which allow access to who knows what, just move along. Especially when the leaders give off the cuff responses without reference.

Alternative #2 - Don't get hung up on typos everyone including me , make them in Forum.  Do some due diligence as the property you are talking about is very important to the security of the United States and maybe talk to somebody at MICC.   Or do some reading, it is advocated in Forum, and figure out that there is guidance and that guidance is found here -  https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/500064p.pdf.   And most importantly the guidance provides this ( I added the emphasis) - 

a. Accountable property records will be established in an APSR for:

(5) Property of any value provided to a contractor as government furnished property (GFP).

C Culham said:

Oh what the heck tell your other COR not to worry, after all the leaders of Forum think it is a trivial matter and are hung up on ASPR and where to find it.

@C Culham What leaders of the Forum think that?

Good job finding the DOD instruction. The OP could have, and should have, found it for himself.

I wonder if the laptops would be considered "incidental to the place of performance" as described at FAR 45.000(b). 

Government property that is incidental to the place of performance, when the contract requires contractor personnel to be located on a Government site or installation, and when the property used by the contractor within the location remains accountable to the Government. Items considered to be incidental to the place of performance include, for example, office space, desks, chairs, telephones, computers, and fax machines.

Don Mansfield said:

I wonder

Could be....below is from the reference I already provided.   I had this thought from the get go.   What does the CO say about the situation?  Per the OP we have one COR talking to another.   It would seem the CO is the one that has the say.

c. Administrative property typically does not meet the definition of GFP; however, the terms and conditions of the contract may dictate otherwise. Before establishing formal GFP records for administrative property when no previous accountable property record has been established, the responsible APO must determine, in coordination with the contracting officer or legal counsel, if the property can be designated as “incidental to place of performance” as defined in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 45.000(b)(5). When administrative property can be so designated, a formal GFP record is not required. If the property does not meet “incidental to place of performance” criteria, the responsible APO must establish a formal GFP record.

I wouldn't think laptops would be "incidental to a place of performance," since they exist to allow the user to operate from almost anywhere. This would especially seem to be the case if the contractor employees are allowed to travel with the laptops and to take them home.

It is unclear to me whether "administrative property" is a subcategory of property "incidental to the place of performance" or a distinct category. But whether the contractor must maintain a property record for laptops may depend on whether the government has established a "previous accountable property record." If it has, then it seems to me that the CO should require the contractor to maintain a property record.

Then again, laptops are generally cheap (unless it's a MacBook Air or a MacBook Pro).

But there is this:

C Culham said:

Do some due diligence as the property you are talking about is very important to the security of the United States and maybe talk to somebody at MICC.

Emphasis added.

Vern Edwards said:

I wouldn't think laptops would be "incidental to a place of performance," since they exist to allow the user to operate from almost anywhere. This would especially seem to be the case if the contractor employees are allowed to travel with the laptops and to take them home.

It is unclear to me whether "administrative property" is a subcategory of property "incidental to the place of performance" or a distinct category. But whether the contractor must maintain a property record for laptops may depend on whether the government has established a "previous accountable property record." If it has, then it seems to me that the CO should require the contractor to maintain a property record.

Then again, laptops are generally cheap (unless it's a MacBook Air or a MacBook Pro).

But there is this:

Emphasis added.

Vern, I agree with you. I wasn’t able to determine when the “incidental to the place of performance” language was written. Desktop computers tended to be unwieldy, thus less likely to be taken away from the workplace. Laptops are highly mobile - and as stated- “…very important to the security of the United States…”

Security, hacking, theft, etc. concerns and defenses are much more emphasized now vs. 20 or more years ago. Laptops are often replacing desktops now.

American Airlines crushed my my  $4500 Government Dell (or Gateway?) laptop computer and six or seven other bags/cases in the jetway elevator door frame about  10-13 years ago. They tried to evade responsibility for damage to computers when gate checked but their negligence was so gross that I convinced them to pay for the computer.

That’s not cheap, like one many of us can buy now, although prices have come down.

Just saying that government laptops don’t seem to be “incidental to the place of performance” AND can be expensive. The contract should provide for contractor accountability.

One would think that care, security and accountability for government issued laptops intended for contractor use would be at least mentioned in a contract these days. Likely identified as “accountable government furnished property”.

Here’s another perspective from DAU.  I was looking for something else and came across this by accident

https://www.dau.edu/aap/pages/ArticleContent.aspx?itemid=18602

formerfed said:

Here’s another perspective from DAU.  I was looking for something else and came across this by accident

https://www.dau.edu/aap/pages/ArticleContent.aspx?itemid=18602

Thanks, formerfed.

I am surprised that the AAP questioner’s organization doesn’t hold individuals (govt employees?)  accountable for laptop computers. In my organization, the loss or damage to a government employee’s computer would probably have resulted in a “Report of Survey”. If the government employee was found to be grossly negligent, they might be held personally liable for a loss.

The government doesn’t need to make contractor employees accountable or liable.  They should make the contractor accountable for issued laptop computers.

joel hoffman said:

I wasn’t able to determine when the “incidental to the place of performance” language was written.

The language "incidental to the place of performance" was added to FAR 45.000 by FAC 2005-56, 77 FR 12937, March 2, 2012, effective April 2, 2012. The change was accompanied by the following comment and response:

Quote

Comments: The same respondent recommended a number of other revisions to the Government responsibilities, also primarily in FAR subpart 45.6, Reporting, Reutilization, and Disposal. The respondent proposed to revise FAR 45.600, Scope of subpart (which was not included in the proposed rule) to allow for either the contracting officer or the plant clearance officer to perform plant clearance officer duties. The respondent recommended removing the proposed rule's requirement, at FAR 45.603(b), for the plant clearance officer to obtain approval at one level higher than the contracting officer before allowing the abandonment of sensitive property that does not require demilitarization. The respondent requested the addition of more examples of items considered to be incidental to the place of performance (see FAR 45.000).

Response: The above recommendations are not incorporated into the final rule because (1) contracting officers generally rely on the Government property expertise of plant clearance officers, (2) additional review and approval requirements can provide a broader perspective, and (3) too often, lists of examples are treated inappropriately as exhaustive lists.

joel hoffman said:

The government doesn’t need to make contractor employees accountable or liable.  They should make the contractor accountable for issued laptop computers.

45.104 Responsibility and liability for Government property.

      (a) Generally, contractors are not held liable for loss of Government property under the following types of contracts:

           (1) Cost-reimbursement contracts.

           (2) Time-and-material contracts.

           (3) Labor-hour contracts.

           (4) Fixed-price contracts awarded on the basis of submission of certified cost or pricing data.

      (b) The contracting officer may revoke the Government’s assumption of risk when the property administrator determines that the contractor’s property management practices are noncompliant with contract requirements.

      (c) A prime contractor that provides Government property to a subcontractor shall not be relieved of any responsibility to the Government that the prime contractor may have under the terms of the prime contract.

      (d) With respect to loss of Government property, the contracting officer, in consultation with the property administrator, shall determine-

           (1) The extent, if any, of contractor liability based upon the amount of damages corresponding to the associated property loss; and

           (2) The appropriate form and method of Government recovery (may include repair, replacement, or other restitution).

      (e) Any monies received as financial restitution shall be credited to the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts, unless otherwise authorized by statute ( 31 U.S.C. 3302(b)).

@Dave T  If I were you advising another COR, I would just tell the other person to raise the issue with their CO/KO.  The CO can then coordinate with a knowledgable property person.

Any answer here is meaningless if the CO and property person doesn’t agree.  Plus it’s really impossible to decipher unless we know how the laptops are used in contract performance.  Who knows, maybe the current contract arrangement with the other COR is fine.

Laptops, other than those used in sensitive situations, are dirt cheap.  In some situations, they don’t cost more than a high end smart phone.  I would just send the question to the CO and quit worrying.

In my recent experience (with DoD) laptops have pretty much replaced all desktop computers. Rarely do you see any employees, either government or contractor, with a desktop computer.  Yes, laptops are mobile, but not everyone with a laptop takes it out of the Government facility.  During my previous 2 assignments laptops were always considered ""incidental to the place of performance", even if the contractor employees were occasionally taking them out of the Government facility to work.  The way accountability was maintained is there was a Government employee assigned responsibility for the laptops. That Government employee would then "hand receipt" the laptops to the contractor employee. We did have one instance where a contractor employee lost a laptop (stolen from her car).  I know it became a sticky issue as the contractor said they were not responsible for any Government property in accordance with the terms of the contract.  I wasn't directly involved, so don't know how the issue was resolved.