WIFCON readers,
I'm advising on an agency level IDIQ evaluation for professional engineering services. Prices to be on contract will be ceiling prices for various line items of professional labor, with task orders competed for upcoming requirements. The solicitation language makes line item price reasonableness important, but also has a balancing test that gives consideration of the line item prices in the context of the overall offered/evaluated price (line items x estimated quantities for each). That balancing test was intended to make sure no line item prices were excessive, but to allow for natural variation amongst offers above and below the mean (or median) without setting arbitrary cutoffs for line item pricing - with the notion that true outliers on a CLIN would be deemed a high risk, and result in offeror elimination. Total price to the Government was to be assessed through the lens of the overall offered price values. Both the evaluation of line item pricing and the evaluation of overall offered price had roles.
New players have come into the mix, and are debating taking a very hard line on CLIN level pricing, as opposed to just scrubbing the CLIN level for excessive prices - which in my view may nix the balancing test, potentially rendering the role of the overall offered price case meaningless, and I see risk in that. The expressed reason for the new take on what to do with CLIN level price evaluation is that the solicitation states CLIN prices will be reviewed for reasonableness. True, but that's true regardless of if that's stated or not, and has to understood in context of the overall price evaluation model so as to not upset the balancing test (to not render it meaningless). It seems to come down to two different views of what is reasonable for CLIN level prices in the award of a contract.
Any suggestions of what to say to or show (e.g., words, FAR or case law cites) folks to help them use jurisprudence in this matter - they seem stuck and the conversation is looping?