![]() |
DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY |
1/19/2000 |
|
MEMORANDUM FOR :
Deputy Under Secretary of the Army (International Affairs) SUBJECT : Inclusion of Offset Costs in Letters of Offer and Acceptance (LOAs) (DSCA 00-01) REFERENCE :
The referenced memorandum (attached) provided clarification of the requirements for including offset costs in pricing of Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts financed wholly with customer cash or repayable Foreign Military Financing (FMF) credits. Per this memorandum, contracting officers were advised to treat all offset costs as allowable FMS contract costs. Effective 14 Sep 99, the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) was changed to reflect this policy. The DFARS, section 225.7303-2(a)(3) now states that "A U.S. defense contractor may recover all costs incurred for offset agreements with a foreign government or international organization if the LOA is financed wholly with customer cash or repayable foreign military finance credits." Nonrepayable FMF funds may not be used to pay offsets. The Omnibus Appropriation Act (P.L.106-113) which incorporated H.R.3427, signed 29 Nov 99, also made some changes to offset policy. The new law requires that 36(b)(1) notifications include a "description of any offset agreement with respect to such sale" and establishes a review commission to study the use of offsets in international defense trade. In order to ensure our guidance is consistent with the DFARS and new legal requirements, the Security Assistance Management Manual (SAMM) must be revised. The following changes are effective immediately:
The revised paragraphs and tables are effective immediately and will be included in the automated version of the SAMM found in the Defense Acquisition Deskbook. If you have any questions concerning this change, please contact Beth Baker, DSCA/PSD-PMD, (703) 604-6612, DSN 664-6612 or e-mail: beth.baker@osd.pentagon.mil. ATTACHMENT : CC : AMSAC-OL-MP |
||
|
Attachment 1.
Pricing Issues in Foreign Military Sales MEMORANDUM FOR :
Directors of Defense Agencies SUBJECT : Pricing Issues in Foreign Military Sales Contracts I want to clarify the requirements for pricing Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts, including the treatment of offset costs. In today's global marketplace, there is significant competition for sales of military equipment, with U.S. systems competing against foreign systems and other U.S. systems (for example, F-15 vs. F-16) to meet foreign governments' requirements. In these situations, competitions run by foreign governments should determine the price to be paid. This is true even if the sale to the foreign government is then processed as a foreign military sale and even if DoD is buying the same item sole source. The contracting officer should consult with the foreign government through security assistance personnel to determine whether adequate price competition occurred. If so, this meets the requirement of FAR 15.403-1(b)(1), which states that the submission of certified cost or pricing data shall not he required when the contract price is based on adequate price competition. No further data to support the price should be requested. In pricing noncompetitive FMS contracts where cost or pricing data is obtained, DFARS 225.7303-2(a) instructs contracting officers to recognize the reasonable and allocable costs of doing business with a foreign government, including offset implementation costs, except when the purchase is financed with funds made available on a nonrepayable basis. In 1995, the language at DFARS 225.7303-2 (a) (3) was changed to allow all costs of implementing an offset agreement. There appear to be differences in how this language is being interpreted and implemented. Contracting officers should treat all offset costs as allowable FMS contract costs. To disallow such costs means that U.S. companies must absorb offset costs that are required by the foreign government as a condition of making the sale. It is only reasonable that foreign governments that require offsets should bear the costs of those offsets. Eleanor R. Spector |
|
Attachment 2. Table 703-3B -- Offset Information -- Advance Notification (Classification) Reporting of offset agreements in accordance with Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), as amended by Section 1245 of H.R.3427 enacted by P.L.106-113 dated November 29, 1999, requires a description of any offset agreement with respect to this proposed sale. Section 36(b)(1)(g) of the AECA (as amended) provides that reported information related to offset agreements be treated as confidential information in accordance with section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2411(c)). Information about offsets for this proposed sale are described below: -- general description of the performance required for the offset agreement. Section 36(b)(1)(g) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2776) requires this information to be treated as "Confidential Information" in accordance with section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2411(c)). This information is exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code, and shall not be published or disclosed without a determination that withholding is contrary to the national interest.
Derived From: SEC 12(C) of the EAA of 1979 (50 U.S.C. APP.2411(C)) (Classification) |
|
Attachment 3. Table 703-5B -- Offset Information - Statutory Notification (Classification) Reporting of offset agreements in accordance with Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), as amended by Section 1245 of H.R.3427 enacted by P.L.106-113 dated November 29, 1999, requires a description of any offset agreement with respect to this proposed sale. Section 36(b)(1)(g) of the AECA (as amended) provides that reported information related to offset agreements be treated as confidential information in accordance with section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2411(c)). Information about offsets for this proposed sale are described below: -- general description of the performance required for the offset agreement. Section 36(b)(1)(g) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2776) requires this information to be treated as "Confidential Information" in accordance with section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2411(c)). This information is exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code, and shall not be published or disclosed without a determination that withholding is contrary to the national interest.
Derived From: SEC 12(C) of the EAA of 1979 (50 U.S.C. APP. 2411(C)) (Classification) |