Ask A Question
Before submitting a question, please…
- Use the menu on the left to review the questions that have been previously asked and answered.
- Search the Ask A Professor library by typing your question into the text box at the top of this (or any) page and clicking the Search button.
- After all that, if you’re sure no one has already asked and answered your question, then…
|
|
|
|
|
Question and Answer Detail
| |
|
Title - Discussions during the LPTA process
Question -
Question #1: Do we have to send an unsuccessful offeror's letter to the two unacceptable offerors, expressing they have been eliminated from the competitive range before we enter into disussions?
Question #2: Does opening discussions with the apparent low make it necessary to open discussions with all other "acceptable" offerors? If so, should the basis of opening discussions be relatively the same? Additionally, do we have to consider the "unacceptable" offeror if there is a request for price proposal revision?
Scenario -
We have 8 proposals that have been evaluated using the LPTA Source Selection Guidance. 6 of the 8 proposals were determined to be "acceptable" and two were "unacceptable." When evaluating the prices for the acceptable proposals, we found potential unbalanced pricing within the apparent low offeror's price proposal. Because of this, we would like to enter into discussions with the apprarent low offeror.
Posted - 3/27/2012 9:33:00 AM
Subject Area - Contracting - Source Selection
|
|
| |
|
1. Yes, as the notification requirements of FAR 15.503(a) also apply to LPTA evaluations.
2. The problem with opening discussions in the sense of FAR 15.306(d) is that there is no way to have meaningful discussions with any offeror other than the one suspected of having unbalanced pricing. In other words, the other offerors will not be able to make their already technically acceptable proposals "more" technically acceptable, as the LPTA process does not recognize degrees of acceptability. It would make more sense in your situation to hold communications (per FAR 15.306(b)) with the offeror suspected of unbalanced pricing to determine if they should be included in the competitive range to begin with.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warnings and Disclaimers
DISCLAIMER: The information contained with�in this server is not official United States Government policy and cannot be construed as official in any way.
NOTICE: Unauthorized attempts to upload information or change information on this service are strictly prohibited and may be punishable under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986. All information contained within this server is considered public information and may be distributed or copied. Anyone using this system consents to monitoring of this use by system or security personnel.
DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY: With respect to documents available from this server, the United States Government nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
DISCLAIMER OF ENDORSEMENT:
Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government. The views and opinions of authors expresses herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.
|
|