CORB EXAMS SCRIPT 2026/2027 QUESTIONS AND
SOLUTIONS RATED A+
✔✔How does a PCO get their authority? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 1.602-1; FAR 1.603-1
ANSWER: FAR 1.602-1 states that Contracting Officers must receive clear written
instructions as to the limits of their authority from the appointing authority. FAR 1.603-1
states that agency heads or their designees may select and appoint contracting officers
and terminate their appointments. For AFMC, the role of appointing official has been
delegated to the Senior Center Contracting Official (SCCO), i.e. AFLCMC Director of
Contracting. In a broader sense, authority to pay debts and obligate the Government
stems from Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which grants that authority to
Congress. Congress gives authority to the Department of Defense, who in turn gives
authority to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition) (ASAF(A)), then to the
MAJCOM SCO (HQ AFMC/PK), to the SCCO (AFLCMC Director of Contracting), and
ultimately to the PCO.
✔✔MIRTS and Peer Review are hot topics in today's acquisition arena. Describe the
differences between a MIRT and a Peer Review. - ✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS 201.170;
AFFARS 5301.170; AFFARS MP 5301.9001(b) ANSWER: Multi-functional Independent
Review Teams (MIRTs) are comprised of cross-functional subject matter experts
(SMEs). They act as an advisor to the Clearance Approval Authority (CAA) by validating
each critical decision point (CDP), and are based on policy established in 2009. When
clearance is required, the CAA must use a MIRT if the acquisition is over $50M and
competitive, but the CAA may waive the MIRT or even specific CDPs within the MIRT
based on acquisition/source selection history and procurement/source selection
experience of the acquisition team (MIRTs 1 & 4 are currently waived up to the level of
the SCCO's authority - $1B for competitive). Also, at the discretion of the CAA, MIRTs
can be used for competitive acquisitions < $50M or for sole-source at any dollar
threshold. The CAA appoints the SMEs to constitute the MIRT, and they will review and
assess CDPs as advisors. MIRTs will convene an out-brief with the source selection
team at the conclusion of each CDP. There are 2 Pre-Business Clearance CDPs: (1)
Review draft ASP brief/draft AP, and (2) Review Sections L & M of the RFP. The final 3
CDPs are Pre-Contract Clearance: (3) Review draft Competitive Range Brief or Award
w/o Discussions Brief, (4) Review draft FPR, (5) Review draft Source Selection Decision
briefing. Peer Review kicks in when we have an acquisition over $1 billion. There are
three Peer Reviews required for competitive acquisitions, and two Peer Reviews
required for sole source acquisitions. They are pre-solicitation, pre-FPR, and pre-award
for competitive. They are pre-negotiation and pre-contract award for sole source. Peer
reviews are also advisory, and are made up of senior leaders across DoD. DPAP chairs
the peer review. Peer Reviews are also required POST-AWARD for
✔✔Under what circumstances is ratification of an unauthorized commitment permitted?
In general, what are the generic Air Force (AFFARS) procedures for handling ratification
actions? Who are the approval authorities for ratifications? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR
1.602-3; AFFARS 5301.602-3; AFFARS MP 5301.602-3 ANSWER: According to the
FAR, there are several limitations/circumstances that apply before ratification is
,permitted: Supplies or services have been provided to and accepted by the
Government, or the Government otherwise has obtained or will obtain a benefit resulting
from performance of the unauthorized commitment; The ratifying official has the
authority to enter into a contractual commitment; The resulting contract would otherwise
have been proper if made by an appropriate contracting officer; The contracting officer
reviewing the unauthorized commitment determines the price to be fair and reasonable;
The contracting officer recommends payment and legal counsel concurs in the
recommendation, unless agency procedures expressly do not require such
concurrence; Funds are available and were available at the time the unauthorized
commitment was made The ratification is in accordance with any other limitations
prescribed under agency procedures. In general, the basic AFFARS MP is: The PCO
begins investigation (asks for docs and evidence); and the Commander (where
commitment occurred) provides w/in 30 days to PCO: Report on facts, corrective
actions, disciplinary action, signed statement from person involved, relevant
documentation/records regarding the unauthorized commitment. The PCO collects and
analyzes and if ratification is appropriate, prepares file, that includes: Summary of facts
by PCO that addresses all elements from FAR 1.602-3 Legal opinion Invoice from
contractor Report from commander as above Ratification statement (per language of
reg If more than $30K, PCO forwards file through wing commander for review by
SCO/SCCO (per language in reg). After execution by the appropriate authority, the CO
processes. The contract and the ratification statemen
✔✔You brief an objective at Business clearance. At negotiations, the Contractor is
willing to settle at a number higher than your objective. What do you do? -
✔✔REFERENCE: AFFARS 5301.9000 ANSWER: If the Business Clearance Approval
Authority provided no latitude, you can: Reject the offer and continue negotiations.
Shake hands contingent upon CAA approval of the number (this seems applicable only
if face-to-face negotiations; if email based, seek CAA approval before hand shake). Get
a subsequent Business Clearance from the CAA.
✔✔What are the elements of a contract? - ✔✔REFERENCE: Government Contracts
REFERENCE Book, 4th Edition ANSWER: A generic definition of contract would be an
agreement, enforceable by law, between two or more competent parties, to do or not to
do something not prohibited by law, for a legal consideration. Breaking down that
definition, there must be legal capacity to enter the contract, an offer, acceptance,
consideration, clear and unambiguous terms, and must not include performance of acts
that are illegal.
✔✔What is consideration? - ✔✔REFERENCE: Government Contracts REFERENCE
Book, 4th Edition ANSWER: Consideration is the inducement to a contract: the cause,
motive, price, or impelling influence that leads a party to enter a contract. A binding
contract requires an offer, acceptance of the offer, and consideration. Consideration
generally requires two elements: (1) something must be given that the law regards as of
sufficient legal value for the purpose - either a benefit to the seller or a detriment to the
buyer, and (2) the something (benefit or detriment of legal value) must be dealt with by
the parties as the agreed-upon price or exchange for the promise - there must be a
,"bargained-for exchange." The requirement for consideration does not require that what
is relied upon for consideration be equivalent in value to the promise; the consideration
need only have "some value."
✔✔You are the Contracting Offier negotiating an unclassified substantial research effort
with a large business as the Prime Contractor. During negotiations the Contractor
notifies you that one of its subcontractors, a Large University whose unique capabilities
make it a major player in the effort, refuses to accept the DFARS clause 252.204-7000,
Disclosure of Information. You want this clause included to prohibit the prime or its subs
from releasing potentially sensitive information without your permission. The University
has advised the prime they feel so strongly that this clause would impair their academic
freedom that they will not participate in this effort unless the clause is removed. What
should you consider in formulating your response? - ✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS
204.404-70; DFARS 252.204-7000 ANSWER: The clause in question is required in
solicitations and contracts when the contractor will have access to or generate
unclassified information that may be sensitive and inappropriate for release to the
public. If you truly believe that there will be sensitive information generated (confirm with
the PM, legal office, and Foreign Technology Office to determine if military critical
technologies will in fact be produced), you should not agree to delete this clause. The
clause just requires that the contractor (and subcontractors) get permission from the
PCO before release of information, not that all information disclosure is unauthorized
out of principle. If explaining this distinction does not quell the university's fears, perhaps
it might be possible to designate certain portions of the effort as "protected," requiring
prior approval to release, with other portions that the university could release on its own.
It would also be helpful to know if the university's portion of the effort even deals with
anything that is sensitive.
✔✔You're a PCO and your buyer, Bob, has just concluded negotiations on a $5.2M cost
plus fixed fee contract. At the conclusion of negotiations, the contractor asked Bob how
long it would be before they would receive the signed contract. The contractor is very
anxious to get started on the work because he doesn't have enough work to keep his
employees on the payroll. If the contract you and Bob are awarding doesn't start soon,
the contractor will be forced to lay off some of his employees. Bob tells the contractor
that it shouldn't take more than 5 days to get the fully executed contract awarded. The
contractor tells Bob that he may even be willing to begin work prior to contract award
but he's concerned that all of his costs won't be recognized once the contract is
awarded. Bob tells the contractor that he'll talk to you to see if there are any contracting
tools that can be used in this situation. What advice would you - ✔✔REFERENCE:
AFMC MP 5304.101-90 ANSWER: If you feel there is enough justification to allow the
contractor to begin early, you could seek COCO approval for an early effective date. To
use an early effective date, you need to have agreement on terms, conditions, and
price, and funds must be available. You will need to advise the contractor in writing that
only allowable, allocable, and reasonable costs will be accepted (same as those
incurred after award), and that if the contract does not materialize, the costs must be at
the contractor's own risk. You can provide contractual coverage with a letter contract or
, other UCA action. If the envisioned contract award date is more than 30 days from the
early effective date, obtain legal review.
✔✔You have just awarded 3 contract actions. You remember something in FAR Part 5
about synopsizing contract awards. The first action was a Small Business Innovation
Research contract for $99,978. The second action was a $3M new delivery order under
an existing IDIQ contract and the third action was a purchase order for $12,995. As a
PCO, would you synopsize these contract actions? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 5.301(b);
FAR 5.002 ANSWER: In general, we publicize contract actions in order to (a) increase
competition, (b) broaden industry participation in meeting Government requirements,
and (c) assist small business concerns and minority small businesses in obtaining
contracts and subcontracts, as outlined in FAR 5.002. However, there are various
reasons prescribed in FAR 5.301(b) where synopses for contract awards are not
required. In particular, synopses are not required for awards under the Small Business
Innovation Development Act of 1982, for orders placed under FAR 16.5 (ID/IQ), or for
orders below the SAT. However, dollar threshold is not a prohibition against publicizing
an award of a smaller amount when publicizing would be advantageous to industry or to
the Government.
✔✔Describe some of the exceptions to the requirement to synopsize a proposed
action? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 5.202; AFFARS 5305.202; AFMC MP 5305.202
ANSWER: The PCO need not submit a synopsis for a proposed contract action if the
head of the agency determines in writing (after consultation with Administration of
Federal Procurement Policy and Administrator of the Small Business Administration)
that advance notice is not appropriate or reasonable. According to AFFARS, the PCO
must route this type of request through SCO/SCCO to SAF/AQC, address why it's not
appropriate/reasonable to synopsize and identify alternative actions to optimize
opportunities for small business. AFMC MP guidance says to also coordinate through
local Small Business Director and that non-AFLCMC actions should go through the HQ
AFMC/PK workflow rather than the SCO/SCCO as prescribed by AFFARS. Besides the
process for special cases above, there are 14 standard exceptions to synopsizing a
proposed contract action: The synopsis would disclose classified information if the
requirement was published (but you can't use this as an excuse....if you could word it
differently so that it could be published you must) The synopsis is a contract action with
a J&A for unusual and compelling urgency, and the Gov't would be seriously injured if
complies with time period The action stems from an international agreement or treaty or
payment from foreign government, and it requires the acquisition come from specified
sources Required or authorized specifically by statute to a particular source, including
8(a) and AbilityOne Utility services (other than telecommunications) and only one
source is available. An order under IDIQ contract (Subpart 16.5). It's a Small Business
Innovation Development Act action (SBIR). It's from an unsolicited research proposal
that is a unique and innovative concept and publication would disclose originality.
Perishable subsistence
✔✔Describe how the synopsis process can be streamlined when acquiring commercial
items. - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 5.203(a)(2); FAR 12.603ANSWER: The synopsis
SOLUTIONS RATED A+
✔✔How does a PCO get their authority? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 1.602-1; FAR 1.603-1
ANSWER: FAR 1.602-1 states that Contracting Officers must receive clear written
instructions as to the limits of their authority from the appointing authority. FAR 1.603-1
states that agency heads or their designees may select and appoint contracting officers
and terminate their appointments. For AFMC, the role of appointing official has been
delegated to the Senior Center Contracting Official (SCCO), i.e. AFLCMC Director of
Contracting. In a broader sense, authority to pay debts and obligate the Government
stems from Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which grants that authority to
Congress. Congress gives authority to the Department of Defense, who in turn gives
authority to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition) (ASAF(A)), then to the
MAJCOM SCO (HQ AFMC/PK), to the SCCO (AFLCMC Director of Contracting), and
ultimately to the PCO.
✔✔MIRTS and Peer Review are hot topics in today's acquisition arena. Describe the
differences between a MIRT and a Peer Review. - ✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS 201.170;
AFFARS 5301.170; AFFARS MP 5301.9001(b) ANSWER: Multi-functional Independent
Review Teams (MIRTs) are comprised of cross-functional subject matter experts
(SMEs). They act as an advisor to the Clearance Approval Authority (CAA) by validating
each critical decision point (CDP), and are based on policy established in 2009. When
clearance is required, the CAA must use a MIRT if the acquisition is over $50M and
competitive, but the CAA may waive the MIRT or even specific CDPs within the MIRT
based on acquisition/source selection history and procurement/source selection
experience of the acquisition team (MIRTs 1 & 4 are currently waived up to the level of
the SCCO's authority - $1B for competitive). Also, at the discretion of the CAA, MIRTs
can be used for competitive acquisitions < $50M or for sole-source at any dollar
threshold. The CAA appoints the SMEs to constitute the MIRT, and they will review and
assess CDPs as advisors. MIRTs will convene an out-brief with the source selection
team at the conclusion of each CDP. There are 2 Pre-Business Clearance CDPs: (1)
Review draft ASP brief/draft AP, and (2) Review Sections L & M of the RFP. The final 3
CDPs are Pre-Contract Clearance: (3) Review draft Competitive Range Brief or Award
w/o Discussions Brief, (4) Review draft FPR, (5) Review draft Source Selection Decision
briefing. Peer Review kicks in when we have an acquisition over $1 billion. There are
three Peer Reviews required for competitive acquisitions, and two Peer Reviews
required for sole source acquisitions. They are pre-solicitation, pre-FPR, and pre-award
for competitive. They are pre-negotiation and pre-contract award for sole source. Peer
reviews are also advisory, and are made up of senior leaders across DoD. DPAP chairs
the peer review. Peer Reviews are also required POST-AWARD for
✔✔Under what circumstances is ratification of an unauthorized commitment permitted?
In general, what are the generic Air Force (AFFARS) procedures for handling ratification
actions? Who are the approval authorities for ratifications? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR
1.602-3; AFFARS 5301.602-3; AFFARS MP 5301.602-3 ANSWER: According to the
FAR, there are several limitations/circumstances that apply before ratification is
,permitted: Supplies or services have been provided to and accepted by the
Government, or the Government otherwise has obtained or will obtain a benefit resulting
from performance of the unauthorized commitment; The ratifying official has the
authority to enter into a contractual commitment; The resulting contract would otherwise
have been proper if made by an appropriate contracting officer; The contracting officer
reviewing the unauthorized commitment determines the price to be fair and reasonable;
The contracting officer recommends payment and legal counsel concurs in the
recommendation, unless agency procedures expressly do not require such
concurrence; Funds are available and were available at the time the unauthorized
commitment was made The ratification is in accordance with any other limitations
prescribed under agency procedures. In general, the basic AFFARS MP is: The PCO
begins investigation (asks for docs and evidence); and the Commander (where
commitment occurred) provides w/in 30 days to PCO: Report on facts, corrective
actions, disciplinary action, signed statement from person involved, relevant
documentation/records regarding the unauthorized commitment. The PCO collects and
analyzes and if ratification is appropriate, prepares file, that includes: Summary of facts
by PCO that addresses all elements from FAR 1.602-3 Legal opinion Invoice from
contractor Report from commander as above Ratification statement (per language of
reg If more than $30K, PCO forwards file through wing commander for review by
SCO/SCCO (per language in reg). After execution by the appropriate authority, the CO
processes. The contract and the ratification statemen
✔✔You brief an objective at Business clearance. At negotiations, the Contractor is
willing to settle at a number higher than your objective. What do you do? -
✔✔REFERENCE: AFFARS 5301.9000 ANSWER: If the Business Clearance Approval
Authority provided no latitude, you can: Reject the offer and continue negotiations.
Shake hands contingent upon CAA approval of the number (this seems applicable only
if face-to-face negotiations; if email based, seek CAA approval before hand shake). Get
a subsequent Business Clearance from the CAA.
✔✔What are the elements of a contract? - ✔✔REFERENCE: Government Contracts
REFERENCE Book, 4th Edition ANSWER: A generic definition of contract would be an
agreement, enforceable by law, between two or more competent parties, to do or not to
do something not prohibited by law, for a legal consideration. Breaking down that
definition, there must be legal capacity to enter the contract, an offer, acceptance,
consideration, clear and unambiguous terms, and must not include performance of acts
that are illegal.
✔✔What is consideration? - ✔✔REFERENCE: Government Contracts REFERENCE
Book, 4th Edition ANSWER: Consideration is the inducement to a contract: the cause,
motive, price, or impelling influence that leads a party to enter a contract. A binding
contract requires an offer, acceptance of the offer, and consideration. Consideration
generally requires two elements: (1) something must be given that the law regards as of
sufficient legal value for the purpose - either a benefit to the seller or a detriment to the
buyer, and (2) the something (benefit or detriment of legal value) must be dealt with by
the parties as the agreed-upon price or exchange for the promise - there must be a
,"bargained-for exchange." The requirement for consideration does not require that what
is relied upon for consideration be equivalent in value to the promise; the consideration
need only have "some value."
✔✔You are the Contracting Offier negotiating an unclassified substantial research effort
with a large business as the Prime Contractor. During negotiations the Contractor
notifies you that one of its subcontractors, a Large University whose unique capabilities
make it a major player in the effort, refuses to accept the DFARS clause 252.204-7000,
Disclosure of Information. You want this clause included to prohibit the prime or its subs
from releasing potentially sensitive information without your permission. The University
has advised the prime they feel so strongly that this clause would impair their academic
freedom that they will not participate in this effort unless the clause is removed. What
should you consider in formulating your response? - ✔✔REFERENCE: DFARS
204.404-70; DFARS 252.204-7000 ANSWER: The clause in question is required in
solicitations and contracts when the contractor will have access to or generate
unclassified information that may be sensitive and inappropriate for release to the
public. If you truly believe that there will be sensitive information generated (confirm with
the PM, legal office, and Foreign Technology Office to determine if military critical
technologies will in fact be produced), you should not agree to delete this clause. The
clause just requires that the contractor (and subcontractors) get permission from the
PCO before release of information, not that all information disclosure is unauthorized
out of principle. If explaining this distinction does not quell the university's fears, perhaps
it might be possible to designate certain portions of the effort as "protected," requiring
prior approval to release, with other portions that the university could release on its own.
It would also be helpful to know if the university's portion of the effort even deals with
anything that is sensitive.
✔✔You're a PCO and your buyer, Bob, has just concluded negotiations on a $5.2M cost
plus fixed fee contract. At the conclusion of negotiations, the contractor asked Bob how
long it would be before they would receive the signed contract. The contractor is very
anxious to get started on the work because he doesn't have enough work to keep his
employees on the payroll. If the contract you and Bob are awarding doesn't start soon,
the contractor will be forced to lay off some of his employees. Bob tells the contractor
that it shouldn't take more than 5 days to get the fully executed contract awarded. The
contractor tells Bob that he may even be willing to begin work prior to contract award
but he's concerned that all of his costs won't be recognized once the contract is
awarded. Bob tells the contractor that he'll talk to you to see if there are any contracting
tools that can be used in this situation. What advice would you - ✔✔REFERENCE:
AFMC MP 5304.101-90 ANSWER: If you feel there is enough justification to allow the
contractor to begin early, you could seek COCO approval for an early effective date. To
use an early effective date, you need to have agreement on terms, conditions, and
price, and funds must be available. You will need to advise the contractor in writing that
only allowable, allocable, and reasonable costs will be accepted (same as those
incurred after award), and that if the contract does not materialize, the costs must be at
the contractor's own risk. You can provide contractual coverage with a letter contract or
, other UCA action. If the envisioned contract award date is more than 30 days from the
early effective date, obtain legal review.
✔✔You have just awarded 3 contract actions. You remember something in FAR Part 5
about synopsizing contract awards. The first action was a Small Business Innovation
Research contract for $99,978. The second action was a $3M new delivery order under
an existing IDIQ contract and the third action was a purchase order for $12,995. As a
PCO, would you synopsize these contract actions? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 5.301(b);
FAR 5.002 ANSWER: In general, we publicize contract actions in order to (a) increase
competition, (b) broaden industry participation in meeting Government requirements,
and (c) assist small business concerns and minority small businesses in obtaining
contracts and subcontracts, as outlined in FAR 5.002. However, there are various
reasons prescribed in FAR 5.301(b) where synopses for contract awards are not
required. In particular, synopses are not required for awards under the Small Business
Innovation Development Act of 1982, for orders placed under FAR 16.5 (ID/IQ), or for
orders below the SAT. However, dollar threshold is not a prohibition against publicizing
an award of a smaller amount when publicizing would be advantageous to industry or to
the Government.
✔✔Describe some of the exceptions to the requirement to synopsize a proposed
action? - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 5.202; AFFARS 5305.202; AFMC MP 5305.202
ANSWER: The PCO need not submit a synopsis for a proposed contract action if the
head of the agency determines in writing (after consultation with Administration of
Federal Procurement Policy and Administrator of the Small Business Administration)
that advance notice is not appropriate or reasonable. According to AFFARS, the PCO
must route this type of request through SCO/SCCO to SAF/AQC, address why it's not
appropriate/reasonable to synopsize and identify alternative actions to optimize
opportunities for small business. AFMC MP guidance says to also coordinate through
local Small Business Director and that non-AFLCMC actions should go through the HQ
AFMC/PK workflow rather than the SCO/SCCO as prescribed by AFFARS. Besides the
process for special cases above, there are 14 standard exceptions to synopsizing a
proposed contract action: The synopsis would disclose classified information if the
requirement was published (but you can't use this as an excuse....if you could word it
differently so that it could be published you must) The synopsis is a contract action with
a J&A for unusual and compelling urgency, and the Gov't would be seriously injured if
complies with time period The action stems from an international agreement or treaty or
payment from foreign government, and it requires the acquisition come from specified
sources Required or authorized specifically by statute to a particular source, including
8(a) and AbilityOne Utility services (other than telecommunications) and only one
source is available. An order under IDIQ contract (Subpart 16.5). It's a Small Business
Innovation Development Act action (SBIR). It's from an unsolicited research proposal
that is a unique and innovative concept and publication would disclose originality.
Perishable subsistence
✔✔Describe how the synopsis process can be streamlined when acquiring commercial
items. - ✔✔REFERENCE: FAR 5.203(a)(2); FAR 12.603ANSWER: The synopsis
