CORB 2026/2027 QUESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS RATED
A+
✔✔You are working on a competitive RFP and are nearing completion of Section L,
containing information and instructions to offerors, and Section M, containing evaluation
factors for award. You have just completed a cross-check of Sections L and M to make
sure that there is correlation between the contents of the two sections and you are
satisfied that there is 100% correlation. Your PM comes into your office all excited and
tells you that he wants to include a request for additional information in Section L. In
talking to him, you find that this new information request is not related to any other
information requested from the offerors in Sec L. You also know from your work on the
RFP that there is no corresponding evaluation criteria in Sec M for this information. You
ask him why he wants to include the request in the RFP and he states that this is
important information that he absolutely has to obtain for the success -
✔✔REFERENCE: Various GAO decisions; AFFARS MP 5315.3 (Section L/M
Templates) ANSWER: Section L and Section M must match...exactly! You have to
evaluate the offerors fairly, using the same criteria that exists in Section M, and you
should not be asking the offerors for any information that will not be part of the
evaluation criteria. Although this information may be helpful in making the decision, it
isn't fair to the offerors to have them provide everything but the kitchen sink, when you
aren't evaluating the whole package. If the information that the PM is now requesting is
necessary to be able to evaluate the offerors, the only option available to the PCO is to
include that as another evaluation criteria in Section M. If the information is helpful but
not necessary to conduct a thorough evaluation, then we should not be including it in
Section L or M. So the question to the PM is whether it is necessary or just helpful. If
necessary, add it to both. If only helpful, keep the RFP the way that it is written.
AFFARS has section L & M templates available to help and the ACE conducts regular
Section L & M training.
✔✔You as the Contracting Officer are involved in a very difficult Firm Fixed Price
negotiation which is proposed at $120M. At the present time the two sides are $15M
apart. The Air Force maximum position would allow movement of $8M. The Program
Manager is concerned about the length of time the negotiation is taking and has asked
you about the possibility of offering the contractor a 50/50 split of the present positions.
What would be your response? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.405; FAR 15.406-1
ANSWER: If a fair and reasonable price for the government to pay is no more than the
$8M that they can move...then splitting the difference is paying more than the taxpayer
should fairly and reasonably pay. As a contracting officer, you must keep in mind that
you are a steward for the taxpayer, and splitting the difference will not even guarantee
that you will be successful in negotiating it, and it is not a fair and reasonable price. The
Government should never offer a 50/50 split with the contractor for the following
reasons: If the contractor says no, which is very likely with this magnitude of difference,
the Government team has nowhere to go. The credibility of the AFNT is gone since it is
now obvious that only the Government management can settle the acquisition. A move
of this sort allows for little additional room for management to adjust (in this case, only
$500K). If you reserve the right to go back to your previous position if the split is not
,accepted you would be in the same situation as telling the jury to ignore the previous
statement. In other words, the contractor now knows you can go at least to the split
position and they will continue negotiating with this knowledge. The FAR makes clear in
15.405, that if the contractor insists on a price or demands a profit or fee that the PCO
considers unreasonable, the PCO needs to refer the contract action to a level above the
PCO, and document the file accordingly.
✔✔In source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions, what factors, as a
minimum, must be addressed or evaluated? Describe how you would evaluate each
factor? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.304(c); FAR 15.305; DoD Source Selection
Procedures ANSWER: The FAR guidance states that there are two factors that must be
addressed in all source selections, as well as a third one if certain thresholds are met.
The first is price or cost to the Government. Second, the quality of the product or service
is evaluated through one or more non-cost factors, such as past performance,
compliance with solicitation procedures, technical excellence, management capability,
personnel qualifications, and prior experience. The third factor is past performance, and
it is included in all source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions that exceed
the SAT. However, DoD Class Deviation 2013-O0018 increases the thresholds for
various categories of acquisition: (1)For systems and operations support contracts >
$5M (2)For services and information technology contracts > $1M (3)For ship repair and
overhaul contracts > $500KWhile each acquisition might be slightly different, section M
of your solicitation will state exactly how each factor is evaluated. Section M will be
developed with the DoD Source Selection Procedures in mind. Price or cost to the
Government is normally evaluated through cost or price analysis; however, in a
negotiated competitive acquisition, competition normally establishes price
reasonableness. For FFP or fixed-price with EPA, comparison of proposed prices
usually satisfies the requirement for price analysis. For cost-reimbursable, a cost
realism analysis shall be performed. Next, technical factors are evaluated through one
of two methodologies: combined technical/risk rating or separate technical/risk rating.
Both methods have associated rating tables in the DoD Source Selection Procedures
that are meant to reflect the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not
meet minimum pe
✔✔In a Weighted Guidelines, there are 2 factors in the Performance Risk section -
Technical and Management/Cost Control. All of which have a range of 3-7% with a
norm of 5%. What type of considerations would lead you to above normal in Cost
Control? - ✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS 215.404-71-2 ANSWER: For the
management/cost control factor (they are not separate), the CO can assign a higher
than normal value when there is a high degree of management effort. Indicators of this
are: (1)The contractor's value added is both considerable and reasonably difficult;
(2)The effort involves a high degree of integration or coordination; (3)The contractor has
a good record of past performance; (4)The contractor has a substantial record of active
participation in Federal socioeconomic programs; (5)The contractor provides fully
documented and reliable cost estimates;(6)The contractor makes appropriate make-or-
buy decisions; or (7)The contractor has a proven record of cost tracking and control.The
contracting officer may justify a maximum value when the effort— (1)Requires large
,scale integration of the most complex nature; (2)Involves major international activities
with significant management coordination (e.g., offsets with foreign vendors); or (3) Has
critically important milestones.
✔✔What types of questions would you ask in order to determine if a waiver to certified
cost or pricing data (TINA waiver) is proper for an upcoming requirement? Who would
you ask? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.403-1(c)(4); DFARS 215.403-1; DFARS PGI
215.403-1 ANSWER: My first thought is that it's called "an exceptional case waiver" for
a reason. To get the waiver approved by HCA (not delegable), DFARS says the HCA
determination must show that:(1)The property or services being purchased by the
government cannot be reasonably obtained without granting the waiver; (2)The price
can be determined reasonable without submission of cost or pricing data; (3)There are
demonstrated benefits to granting the waiver. Most of my questions would revolve
around answering these three DFARS requirements as they apply to my acquisition. For
instance, some questions might be: 1. Are there alternate ways of procuring the
supplies/services that won't require a waiver? 2. For what reasons would the source not
be able to provide certified cost or pricing data? 3.Is there a potential significant
deficiency with their estimating system?4.How will I accomplish price analysis to
determine price reasonableness since I likely won't have cost or pricing data? 5.For
price analysis, what data is already available, what is needed from the contractor, and
will they cooperate? 6.What adjustments to similar items are necessary to make apple-
to-apple comparison for pricing? 7. Would the subcontractor(s) also need a waiver?
8.What are the demonstrated benefits of the waiver, and does it make good business
sense? If I believe that I may meet the requirements for a waiver, I would obviously talk
with my contracting chain about their experiences with waivers. Then I would ask the
SME in AFLCMC/PK and/or the Pricing team to give me some background on
previously approved waivers and a template to use. DCAA & DCMA would also be good
resources for collecting data for price analysis. AFFARS & AFMC MP list the routing
requirements for the completed waiver
✔✔The subject of this question is waivers to certified cost or pricing data. According to
the FAR, the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) may waive the requirement for
submission of cost or pricing data in exceptional cases. There are two parts to my
question. First, can this waiver power be delegated by the HCA to a lower level?
Second, how are subcontractors handled when requesting a waiver for an acquisition? -
✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.403-1(c)(4); FAR 1.108(b) ANSWER: One of the FAR
conventions is that each authority is delegable unless specifically stated otherwise. In
the case of the waiver, FAR 15.403-1(c)(4) specifically states that the approval is not
delegable below the HCA. Next, the same paragraph of the FAR says that award of any
subcontract expected to exceed the cost or pricing data threshold requires the
submission of cost or pricing data unless: (1) An exception otherwise applies to the
subcontract; or (2) The waiver specifically includes the subcontract and the rationale
supporting the waiver for that subcontract.
✔✔What is a Savings/Reopener Clause and when might you use it? -
✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS 242.7502(g); DFARS 244.305-70(f) ANSWER: A
, Savings/Reopener Clause is a special contract provision (H clause) which creates
explicit authority for an equitable adjustment to the contract price. The equitable
adjustment can be triggered by the occurrence of an event, the non-occurrence of an
event, or some future event or condition which has an unpredictable outcome (a
contingency). If parties cannot mutually agree to resolve the contingency during
negotiations, they may consider using this type of clause. A savings/reopener clause
should only be used in extraordinary situations, where time does not permit resolution of
the contingency and the uncertainty of the contingency could cause a significant impact
to the contract price. The only place this is addressed in the regulations is twice in the
DFARS. In those two instances, it recommends a reopener clause as one option to
mitigate purchasing or accounting system deficiencies that are identified during
negotiations. If the CO believes the negotiations should continue without giving the
contractor time to fix the issue and the proposal, they could add a savings/reopener
clause that would adjust the contract amount after award. Other instances where this
may be used in practice are for adjustments for negotiations conducted in the absence
of FPRA/FPRRs. A downward only adjustment could be used to protect the
Government if the contractor agrees to it.
✔✔You are the PCO and have been unable to reach an agreement with the contractor
on price. There is a difference between the ACO and contractor on both the direct and
indirect rates. The Forward Pricing Rate Agreement was withdrawn last month and the
ACO has published a Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation. If you move away from
the recommended rates, you believe you might be able to quickly complete
negotiations. What are your responsibilities regarding the ACO's rate
recommendations? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.407-3; DFARS 215.407-3; FAR
42.1701; DPAP Memo - Forward Pricing, 11/16/11 ANSWER: The FAR/DFARS says
that we must use the FPRA rates when available, and must seek HCA waiver
(delegated to SCO/SCCO) in order to deviate. The guidance does not mention FPRR
rates, however. A DPAP policy memo from 2011 stated that COs should use DCMA
FPRAs when they exist, and FPRRs to establish pre-negotiation objectives when
FPRAs do not exist. This memo also stated that a CO may, as a result of more current
data, determine the FPRR/FPRA does not accurately reflect the particulars of the
negotiation and deviate from them. COs are expected to discuss such exceptions with
the DCMA CACO or DACO, as well as document their rationale in business
clearance/PNM. As the PCO, you should have used the FPRR to develop your pre-
negotiation objectives. You cannot now change your rates for the sake of expediency,
as your goal is to find the proposal fair and reasonable, not to finish negotiations
quickly. If you believe you have a valid reason, however, such as new information
received as part of the negotiation, you could likely justify the deviation (after discussing
with the ACO as well). If the changes increase your objective and impact your
negotiation range, you may also have to seek clearance approval for revised latitude.
You would want to document all of this in your PNM.
✔✔Please describe the concept of a TINA cut-off date and some things you would
consider before granting one as a Contracting Officer. - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.406-
2; AFMC Contracting Bulletin Dec 2014 ANSWER: FAR 15.406-2, which provides the
A+
✔✔You are working on a competitive RFP and are nearing completion of Section L,
containing information and instructions to offerors, and Section M, containing evaluation
factors for award. You have just completed a cross-check of Sections L and M to make
sure that there is correlation between the contents of the two sections and you are
satisfied that there is 100% correlation. Your PM comes into your office all excited and
tells you that he wants to include a request for additional information in Section L. In
talking to him, you find that this new information request is not related to any other
information requested from the offerors in Sec L. You also know from your work on the
RFP that there is no corresponding evaluation criteria in Sec M for this information. You
ask him why he wants to include the request in the RFP and he states that this is
important information that he absolutely has to obtain for the success -
✔✔REFERENCE: Various GAO decisions; AFFARS MP 5315.3 (Section L/M
Templates) ANSWER: Section L and Section M must match...exactly! You have to
evaluate the offerors fairly, using the same criteria that exists in Section M, and you
should not be asking the offerors for any information that will not be part of the
evaluation criteria. Although this information may be helpful in making the decision, it
isn't fair to the offerors to have them provide everything but the kitchen sink, when you
aren't evaluating the whole package. If the information that the PM is now requesting is
necessary to be able to evaluate the offerors, the only option available to the PCO is to
include that as another evaluation criteria in Section M. If the information is helpful but
not necessary to conduct a thorough evaluation, then we should not be including it in
Section L or M. So the question to the PM is whether it is necessary or just helpful. If
necessary, add it to both. If only helpful, keep the RFP the way that it is written.
AFFARS has section L & M templates available to help and the ACE conducts regular
Section L & M training.
✔✔You as the Contracting Officer are involved in a very difficult Firm Fixed Price
negotiation which is proposed at $120M. At the present time the two sides are $15M
apart. The Air Force maximum position would allow movement of $8M. The Program
Manager is concerned about the length of time the negotiation is taking and has asked
you about the possibility of offering the contractor a 50/50 split of the present positions.
What would be your response? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.405; FAR 15.406-1
ANSWER: If a fair and reasonable price for the government to pay is no more than the
$8M that they can move...then splitting the difference is paying more than the taxpayer
should fairly and reasonably pay. As a contracting officer, you must keep in mind that
you are a steward for the taxpayer, and splitting the difference will not even guarantee
that you will be successful in negotiating it, and it is not a fair and reasonable price. The
Government should never offer a 50/50 split with the contractor for the following
reasons: If the contractor says no, which is very likely with this magnitude of difference,
the Government team has nowhere to go. The credibility of the AFNT is gone since it is
now obvious that only the Government management can settle the acquisition. A move
of this sort allows for little additional room for management to adjust (in this case, only
$500K). If you reserve the right to go back to your previous position if the split is not
,accepted you would be in the same situation as telling the jury to ignore the previous
statement. In other words, the contractor now knows you can go at least to the split
position and they will continue negotiating with this knowledge. The FAR makes clear in
15.405, that if the contractor insists on a price or demands a profit or fee that the PCO
considers unreasonable, the PCO needs to refer the contract action to a level above the
PCO, and document the file accordingly.
✔✔In source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions, what factors, as a
minimum, must be addressed or evaluated? Describe how you would evaluate each
factor? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.304(c); FAR 15.305; DoD Source Selection
Procedures ANSWER: The FAR guidance states that there are two factors that must be
addressed in all source selections, as well as a third one if certain thresholds are met.
The first is price or cost to the Government. Second, the quality of the product or service
is evaluated through one or more non-cost factors, such as past performance,
compliance with solicitation procedures, technical excellence, management capability,
personnel qualifications, and prior experience. The third factor is past performance, and
it is included in all source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions that exceed
the SAT. However, DoD Class Deviation 2013-O0018 increases the thresholds for
various categories of acquisition: (1)For systems and operations support contracts >
$5M (2)For services and information technology contracts > $1M (3)For ship repair and
overhaul contracts > $500KWhile each acquisition might be slightly different, section M
of your solicitation will state exactly how each factor is evaluated. Section M will be
developed with the DoD Source Selection Procedures in mind. Price or cost to the
Government is normally evaluated through cost or price analysis; however, in a
negotiated competitive acquisition, competition normally establishes price
reasonableness. For FFP or fixed-price with EPA, comparison of proposed prices
usually satisfies the requirement for price analysis. For cost-reimbursable, a cost
realism analysis shall be performed. Next, technical factors are evaluated through one
of two methodologies: combined technical/risk rating or separate technical/risk rating.
Both methods have associated rating tables in the DoD Source Selection Procedures
that are meant to reflect the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not
meet minimum pe
✔✔In a Weighted Guidelines, there are 2 factors in the Performance Risk section -
Technical and Management/Cost Control. All of which have a range of 3-7% with a
norm of 5%. What type of considerations would lead you to above normal in Cost
Control? - ✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS 215.404-71-2 ANSWER: For the
management/cost control factor (they are not separate), the CO can assign a higher
than normal value when there is a high degree of management effort. Indicators of this
are: (1)The contractor's value added is both considerable and reasonably difficult;
(2)The effort involves a high degree of integration or coordination; (3)The contractor has
a good record of past performance; (4)The contractor has a substantial record of active
participation in Federal socioeconomic programs; (5)The contractor provides fully
documented and reliable cost estimates;(6)The contractor makes appropriate make-or-
buy decisions; or (7)The contractor has a proven record of cost tracking and control.The
contracting officer may justify a maximum value when the effort— (1)Requires large
,scale integration of the most complex nature; (2)Involves major international activities
with significant management coordination (e.g., offsets with foreign vendors); or (3) Has
critically important milestones.
✔✔What types of questions would you ask in order to determine if a waiver to certified
cost or pricing data (TINA waiver) is proper for an upcoming requirement? Who would
you ask? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.403-1(c)(4); DFARS 215.403-1; DFARS PGI
215.403-1 ANSWER: My first thought is that it's called "an exceptional case waiver" for
a reason. To get the waiver approved by HCA (not delegable), DFARS says the HCA
determination must show that:(1)The property or services being purchased by the
government cannot be reasonably obtained without granting the waiver; (2)The price
can be determined reasonable without submission of cost or pricing data; (3)There are
demonstrated benefits to granting the waiver. Most of my questions would revolve
around answering these three DFARS requirements as they apply to my acquisition. For
instance, some questions might be: 1. Are there alternate ways of procuring the
supplies/services that won't require a waiver? 2. For what reasons would the source not
be able to provide certified cost or pricing data? 3.Is there a potential significant
deficiency with their estimating system?4.How will I accomplish price analysis to
determine price reasonableness since I likely won't have cost or pricing data? 5.For
price analysis, what data is already available, what is needed from the contractor, and
will they cooperate? 6.What adjustments to similar items are necessary to make apple-
to-apple comparison for pricing? 7. Would the subcontractor(s) also need a waiver?
8.What are the demonstrated benefits of the waiver, and does it make good business
sense? If I believe that I may meet the requirements for a waiver, I would obviously talk
with my contracting chain about their experiences with waivers. Then I would ask the
SME in AFLCMC/PK and/or the Pricing team to give me some background on
previously approved waivers and a template to use. DCAA & DCMA would also be good
resources for collecting data for price analysis. AFFARS & AFMC MP list the routing
requirements for the completed waiver
✔✔The subject of this question is waivers to certified cost or pricing data. According to
the FAR, the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) may waive the requirement for
submission of cost or pricing data in exceptional cases. There are two parts to my
question. First, can this waiver power be delegated by the HCA to a lower level?
Second, how are subcontractors handled when requesting a waiver for an acquisition? -
✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.403-1(c)(4); FAR 1.108(b) ANSWER: One of the FAR
conventions is that each authority is delegable unless specifically stated otherwise. In
the case of the waiver, FAR 15.403-1(c)(4) specifically states that the approval is not
delegable below the HCA. Next, the same paragraph of the FAR says that award of any
subcontract expected to exceed the cost or pricing data threshold requires the
submission of cost or pricing data unless: (1) An exception otherwise applies to the
subcontract; or (2) The waiver specifically includes the subcontract and the rationale
supporting the waiver for that subcontract.
✔✔What is a Savings/Reopener Clause and when might you use it? -
✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS 242.7502(g); DFARS 244.305-70(f) ANSWER: A
, Savings/Reopener Clause is a special contract provision (H clause) which creates
explicit authority for an equitable adjustment to the contract price. The equitable
adjustment can be triggered by the occurrence of an event, the non-occurrence of an
event, or some future event or condition which has an unpredictable outcome (a
contingency). If parties cannot mutually agree to resolve the contingency during
negotiations, they may consider using this type of clause. A savings/reopener clause
should only be used in extraordinary situations, where time does not permit resolution of
the contingency and the uncertainty of the contingency could cause a significant impact
to the contract price. The only place this is addressed in the regulations is twice in the
DFARS. In those two instances, it recommends a reopener clause as one option to
mitigate purchasing or accounting system deficiencies that are identified during
negotiations. If the CO believes the negotiations should continue without giving the
contractor time to fix the issue and the proposal, they could add a savings/reopener
clause that would adjust the contract amount after award. Other instances where this
may be used in practice are for adjustments for negotiations conducted in the absence
of FPRA/FPRRs. A downward only adjustment could be used to protect the
Government if the contractor agrees to it.
✔✔You are the PCO and have been unable to reach an agreement with the contractor
on price. There is a difference between the ACO and contractor on both the direct and
indirect rates. The Forward Pricing Rate Agreement was withdrawn last month and the
ACO has published a Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation. If you move away from
the recommended rates, you believe you might be able to quickly complete
negotiations. What are your responsibilities regarding the ACO's rate
recommendations? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.407-3; DFARS 215.407-3; FAR
42.1701; DPAP Memo - Forward Pricing, 11/16/11 ANSWER: The FAR/DFARS says
that we must use the FPRA rates when available, and must seek HCA waiver
(delegated to SCO/SCCO) in order to deviate. The guidance does not mention FPRR
rates, however. A DPAP policy memo from 2011 stated that COs should use DCMA
FPRAs when they exist, and FPRRs to establish pre-negotiation objectives when
FPRAs do not exist. This memo also stated that a CO may, as a result of more current
data, determine the FPRR/FPRA does not accurately reflect the particulars of the
negotiation and deviate from them. COs are expected to discuss such exceptions with
the DCMA CACO or DACO, as well as document their rationale in business
clearance/PNM. As the PCO, you should have used the FPRR to develop your pre-
negotiation objectives. You cannot now change your rates for the sake of expediency,
as your goal is to find the proposal fair and reasonable, not to finish negotiations
quickly. If you believe you have a valid reason, however, such as new information
received as part of the negotiation, you could likely justify the deviation (after discussing
with the ACO as well). If the changes increase your objective and impact your
negotiation range, you may also have to seek clearance approval for revised latitude.
You would want to document all of this in your PNM.
✔✔Please describe the concept of a TINA cut-off date and some things you would
consider before granting one as a Contracting Officer. - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 15.406-
2; AFMC Contracting Bulletin Dec 2014 ANSWER: FAR 15.406-2, which provides the
