Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

lost but found

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Vern, I did not find a definition of "electronic response", but yes email quotes were allowed. Yes, it says the award would be based on lowest price technically acceptable.
  2. Vern, I think the answer may be in 13.106-2(b ) (4)(i) (i) After preliminary consideration of all quotations or offers, identify from all quotations or offers received one that is suitable to the user, such as the lowest priced brand name product, and quickly screen all lower priced quotations or offers based on readily discernible value indicators, such as past performance, warranty conditions, and maintenance availability;
  3. Don, I see where you are going with FAR 15.305(a)(3). If you see Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process 15.101-2( (3) (3) Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using the non-cost/price factors. Would all the offers need to be considered "Acceptable / Non-Acceptable"? Maybe in the future we should re-word the solicitation to read something like: The award will be made to the lowest priced offer whose offer meets the requirements of the solicitation. Offers above the lowest price will only be evaluated if the lowest offer fails to meet these requirements. Thoughts? This is supposed to be simplified aquisition. Requirements to evaluate all offers just delays the process, sometimes by several days.
  4. Don, This is my exact question. As you can imagine, the technical office is not happy about reviewing 13 quotes. We have a CO who is requiring technical's on all quotes. I do not agree, but I cannot find the verbiage to argue otherwise. I spent several hours this morning reading GAO cases and cannot find one that fits my situtation. The "new to us" CO has an extensive background in source selection programs. I am just trying to back up the argument before I create one.
  5. Just want to start off saying thanks to all the members for contributing to these forums. As the title says, Do all quotes received under SAP procedures have to be evaluated? The combo stated award will be made to the lowest price techincally acceptable. Scenario: A combo was issued and posted to FBO. Thirteen quotes were received. Can you simply look at the lowest three quotes or do you have to have technical acceptance/rejection for all quotes? Thanks
  6. Very helpful. Sorry for missing the (a). I did not scroll up far enough.
  7. Need some help with the interpretation of a semicolon. The question is in reguards to the semicolon following (i). Should the semicolon be interpreted as "and"? Does this particular section require all three requirements to be valid? The following FAR reference reads 5.202(13) (13) The proposed contract action-- (i) Is for an amount not expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold; (ii) Will be made through a means that provides access to the notice of proposed contract action through the GPE; and (iii) Permits the public to respond to the solicitation electronically; or (14) The proposed contract action is made under conditions described in 6.302-3 with respect to the services of an expert to support the Federal Government in any current or anticipated litigation or dispute. Thanks for any help on this one. We can't seem to decide. Keith
  8. The problem is now the dates do not match; nor did the awardee have the new one to review before award. I fully agree if the possible awardee was able to review the document and the award document was changed to reflect the new SOW. The problem I see is none of the contractors were able to re-submit proposals accordingly. While there were no major changes that should change the price, I still see this as a problem. Thanks to everyone for contributing.
  9. He is a once upon a time contracting officer that now sits in a reviewer position. I agree, all sounds tight. Wrap it up and make the award. As I said, we are estimating US prices and getting 3rd world returns. They are the decision maker and yes we have to get consensus. Stupid process for below SAT purchases that eats up to much time. Especially at end of year. Another example, we had to make small changes to a SOW and then review the award; back to back and on the same day. The award was approved and released. While making changes to the SOW on the day of award, he made us change the date on the SOW. Now when we send over the award, the vendor has actually never seen the SOW, based on the date change. That sounds arguable in court to me. This is some of the stupidity we are dealing with. Very frustrating. We have real world stuff going on with guys on the ground that need things. Two locations just moved from urinating in a bucket to having a hole. I say that just to show the neccesity of getting these things done quickly.
  10. All the quotes were below the IGE. Left that out. Proposals between $575k-$650k I have heard the same thing about throw out the low and high. This company has done work for us before. We (the organization) have been fighting this battle for a while. Utimatly this person sits in a reviewer postion and does not sign anything, just comments. This is the new "hurdle" we keep hitting. I am just trying to find something to reference for the requirement. His argument is that we could be protested for the prices being awarded below the IGE. I have no idea how that ties together. To be protested, we would have to violate something.
  11. Long time reader, first time poster. Thanks for everyones contributions. We have a KO that has major issue when the proposals come in below the IGE. I have searched the FAR, WIFCON, and the GAO website without any luck. I tend to be pretty good at finding my answers, but I cannot find this mentioned anywhere except for allowable comparisons for price fair and reasonable. Scenario: Deployed in Support of Contingency $1M SAT FFP Commercial item pricing below SAT. IGE: $690,000 Low bid: $575,000 All the quotes were below the IGE. Proposals between $575k-$650k Maybe I just do not understand what the concern is. We have several contracts with this same basic scenario. Basically the IGE is being written with US specs and we are getting 3rd world proposals. Does this even matter? . Dave
×
×
  • Create New...