[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 104 (Monday, July 13, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1743-E1744]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, H.R. 2647

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. ALAN GRAYSON

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, July 13, 2009

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chair, amendment 106 to the Defense Authorization 
Act, H.R. 2647, requires a justification for the use of factors other 
than cost or price as predominant factors in evaluating competitive 
proposals for defense procurement contracts. The intent of this 
provision is to mandate that officials of the Department of Defense 
weight cost or price as the predominant factor in solicitations for 
defense procurement contracts, with only occasional and well-justified 
exceptions.
  This amendment requires quantification of the relative weight of 
evaluation factors in the evaluation scheme, insofar as this is 
necessary to ensure compliance with the amendment.

[[Page E1744]]

  The purposes of this amendment are two-fold. First, the use of cost 
or price as the predominant evaluation factor will result more 
frequently in the selection of the low-cost or a lower-cost offeror, 
which will save the Government money. Second, the use of cost or price 
as the predominant evaluation factor will encourage and incentivize 
offerors to submit ``lean'' proposals that will save the Government 
money.
  Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently criticized military systems 
that ``have grown ever more baroque, have become ever more costly, are 
taking longer to build, and are being fielded in ever-dwindling 
quantities.'' This amendment combats that trend.
  Another recent reminder of the risk of ``gold plating'' comes from 
the ``Marine One'' Presidential helicopter procurement program. It 
would be difficult to identify any commercial helicopter that costs as 
much as $40 million, but the VH-71 helicopters being purchased are 
likely to cost ten times that much. This is more than the cost of the 
Boeing 747s employed in the ``Air Force One'' program, even when that 
cost is adjusted for inflation.
  Agencies may avoid the use of cost or price as predominant factors in 
solicitations only if the procurement officer or agency head determines 
that employing cost or price as predominant factors would--
  (1) Materially increase the risk of failure of the mission or 
missions in which the item being procured will be employed, in an 
ascertainable manner specific to the mission or missions involved;
  (2) Demonstrably threaten the safety or health of members of the 
Armed Forces or persons in their custody or care;
  (3) Result in foreseeable and quantifiable additional defense 
expenditures outside the context of the procurement at hand that exceed 
any savings expected from employing cost or price as predominant 
factors;
  (4) Deprive the Government of post-performance rights or property, 
such as warranties or intellectual property, the quantifiable value of 
which exceeds any savings expected from employing cost or price as 
predominant factors; or
  (5) Violate an international agreement.
  Justifications that are not satisfactory include:
  (1) Preexisting law, other than international agreements;
  (2) A generalized preference for quality, reliability, experience or 
high performance;
  (3) Evolving technical requirements;
  (4) Concerns about contractor responsibility; and
  (5) Any other reason not enumerated as a valid justification above.
  The justification required by this provision generally should follow 
the same procedures as the justifications required for other than full 
and open competition, as currently set forth in Federal Acquisition 
Regulation sections 6.303 and 6.304. In all cases in which extrinsic 
savings or risks are the justification, they shall be described in 
detail, with a description of how they were derived.

                          ____________________