Not A Department of Defense Contract

How can you determine from looking at a contract that it is, or is not a Department of Defense (“DOD”) contract? It’s a matter of numbering. KBT Contracting Corp., B-422622.2, Dec. 12, 2024. In the case of KBT, the solicitation required offerors to submit past performance examples, with at least one project to “have been performed on a DOD contract issued by any DOD component.” KBT’s offer was deemed noncompliant as explained below.

The solicitation was issued by the Army National Guard for maintenance, repair, construction and design-build services in support of National Guard activities in Florida. It required the submission of between 5-7 projects showing work like that required by the solicitation, with at least one required to have been performed on a DOD contract issued by any DOD component.” KBT submitted a timely proposal which it listed as one of its past performance a demolition contract issued by Camp Blanding Joint Training Center Barracks, stating this was a DOD contract. (The only “DOD contract” in KBT’s proposal). The contract was listed as “Project #218042.” No further support was provided, and the contracting officer determined that the contract number demonstrated that the contract number was not a DOD contract. He based this on the requirements of both the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) and the Defense FAR Supplement (“DFARS”).

The following is the Government Accountability Office’s explanation of FAR and DOD numbering:

The FAR requires agencies to assign unique procurement instrument identifiers (“PIID”) for each solicitation, contract, agreement, order, and related procurement instrument. FAR 4.1600. The PIID is used to identify all contract actions. FAR 4.1601. Each PIID consists of 13-17 alpha or numeric characters which are sequenced to convey certain information. FAR 4.1603(a). The first six positions identify the department or agency that issued the instrument. FAR 4.1603(a)(1). The seventh and eight positions indicate the last two digits of the fiscal year in which the procurement was issued or awarded. FAR 4.1603(a)(2). The ninth position is an upper-case letter that identifies the type of instrument, FAR 4.1603(a)(3), and the tenth through seventeenth positions are assigned by the agency that issued the contract. FAR 4.1603(a)(4). All DOD contracts have a 13-digit PIID with at least one letter. DFARS 204.1603(a). When the contracting officer reviewed KBT’s proposal she concluded that the Camp Blanding contract, identified as Project #218042, was not a DOD contract because the contract number did not contain 13 characters or an upper-case alphabetical character.

We find that the contracting officer reasonably concluded that the Camp Blanding contract was not a DOD contract

.

The GAO further noted that there was no other information that indicated this contract was a DOD contract. The contract was issued by the Florida Department of Military Affairs with no references to the FAR or any FAR clauses that are required of a FAR-based contract. Performance under the contract is paid for the state of Florida, and is governed by Section 20.0555(5) of the Florida Statutes. The GAO therefore denied KBT’s protest that its offer should have been considered for award.

Takeaway: Be careful about the refences you use for past performance in any offer you submit in response to a solicitation. Ensure that they are in full compliance with the requirements of the solicitation.

For other helpful suggestions on government contracting, visit:

Richard D. Lieberman’s FAR Consulting & Training at https://www.richarddlieberman.com/, and Mistakes in Government Contracting at https://richarddlieberman.wixsite.com/mistakes.