onmeld

Does anyone know if we can allow a contractor to use the military postal system to ship repair parts overseas? The FAR and DFARS did not provide any guidance. I found the DOD Directive that governs the Military Postal System and it states that contractor employees that accompany the force are allowed priviliges at APOs but it is for their personal mail. I suppose this is how the contractor employess in Afghanistan are getting their mail back home. But what about a company getting repair parts?

Joel and Vern, I really appreciate your comments, they have given me other avenues to ponder. Vern, I will have to request that they look at the price estimates in conjunction with the reasons why the proposals are unacceptable and see what affect those deficiencies have on the price. The purpose of the price evaluation was indeed to determine price reasonableness only. Joel, Thank you for pointing out the extra step regarding the unbalanced pricing aspect of 15.404-1(g). Even though the total proposal price is fair and reasonable, there should still be an analysis by the KO that the actual or apparent unbalenced contract line items regarding the risk(s).

I've scoured GAO decisions, this board, the FAR and Cibinic and Nash but have not really found an answer to give me a warm and fuzzy. We have a FFP procurement where four out of five offerors are technically unacceptable. The SSP indicated that we would conduct Price and Technical Evaluations Separately. Obviously we would like to award to the Technically acceptable proposal but am wondering if we can use the prices of the unacceptable proposals to establish the pricing as being fair and reasonable based on competition FAR 15.404-1((2)(1). Even though we only have one technically acceptable proposal I can find nothing that prevents us from using the pricing from the technically unacceptable proposals to do our price analysis and believe that we are on solid ground to do so. As usual the Government estimate is completely wrong. But the dilema does not end there, the technically acceptable proposal has unbalanced CLINS and contains FAR Provision 52. 215-1 in Section L which deals with unbalanced line and subline prices. The provisions of 52.215-1 f(8) however are discretionary and only go to rejection of the proposal (which in this case we want to award on). If there is an explanation regarding the unbalace I believe we are OK to award (an would be OK even if we did not document an explanation). Would appreciate your thoughts. Everything

Thank you Vern!

Dr. Carter's Sept 10 Memorandum requires that we get cost and pricing data when we only receive one offer. I have a commercial items acquisition that was set aside for competition amongst small businesses but we only received one offer. I do not believe his memo applies and that, because we are using FAR Part 13 procedures, we can determine fair and reasonbleness of pricing using procedures in FAR Subpart 13.106-3. Has anyone had a similiar situation or does anyone think I am incorrect? Thanks!