[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-28169]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: November 17, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Part 1871

 

Modification of Test of MidRange Procurement Procedures

AGENCY: Office of Procurement, NASA.

ACTION: Temporary rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Procurement Policy approved a test of 
NASA's MidRange Procurement Procedures in 1993. This modification of 
the procedures is a result of OFPP's approval to expand the test to all 
NASA centers and addresses other editorial and substantive changes.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This regulation is effective November 17, 1994, and 
expires June 30, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. T. Deback, (202) 358-0431.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MidRange Procurement Procedures were 
published in 58 FR 54300, October 21, 1993.

    Comments on the test procedure had been requested in 57 FR 57845, 
December 7, 1992. The following substantive changes are being made to 
the MidRange Procurement Procedures: (1) Authority to utilize these 
procedures at all NASA centers is provided, (2) construction and A&E 
contracts may now be done under MidRange, (3) the Best Value Selection 
procedures have been simplified to limit the value characteristics, and 
(4) the Electronic Bulletin Board aspects of MidRange have been 
clarified since we will be using Internet in lieu of a separate 
bulletin board. The use of the Electronic Bulletin Board was approved 
as part of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act. NASA is in the 
process of developing the Bulletin Board and will provide industry 
notice of its use through the Commerce Business Daily. NASA will 
continue publishing synopses in the Commerce Business Daily until that 
notice is provided.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 1871

    Government Procurement.
Thomas S. Luedtke,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Procurement.

    Accordingly, under the authority of 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1), 48 CFR 
ch. 18 is amended by revising part 1871 to read as follows:

PART 1871--MIDRANGE PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES

1871.000  Scope of part.

Subpart 1871.1--General

1871.101  Purpose.
1871.102  Authority.
1871.103  Applicability.
1871.104  Definitions.
1871.105  Policy.

Subpart 1871.2--Planning and Requirements Process

1871.201  Use of buying team.
1871.202  Organizational responsibilities.
1871.202-1  Requiring organization.
1871.202-2  Procurement organization.
1871.202-3  Supporting organizations.
1871.202-4  Center management.
1871.203  Buying team responsibilities.
1871.204  Small business set-asides.

Subpart 1871.3--Publicizing of Solicitation

1871.301  Publicizing policy.
1871.302  Publicizing procedure.

Subpart 1871.4--Request for Offer (RFO)

1871.401  Types of RFO's.
1871.401-1  Sealed offers.
1871.401-2  Two-step competitive procurement.
1871.401-3  Competitive negotiated procurement not using qualitative 
criteria.
1871.401-4  Competitive negotiation using qualitative criteria.
1871.401-5  Noncompetitive negotiations.
1871.402  Preparation of the RFO.
1871.403  Offer preparation period and limitations.
1871.404  Protection of offers.
1871.405  Model contract.
1871.406  RFO by electronic bulletin board.
1871.406-1  Methods of disseminating information.
1871.406-2  Special situations.
1871.406-3  Publicizing and response time.
1871.406-4  Method of soliciting offers.

Subpart 1871.5--Award

1871.501  Representations and certifications.
1871.502  Determination of responsible contractor.
1871.503  Negotiation documentation.
1871.504  Award documents.
1871.505  Notifications to unsuccessful offerors.
1871.506  Publication of award.
1871.507  Debriefing of unsuccessful offerors.

Subpart 1871.6--``Best Value Selection''

1871.601  General.
1871.602  Specifications for MidRange procurements.
1871.603  Establishment of evaluation criteria.
1871.604  Evaluation phases.
1871.604-1  Initial Evaluation.
1871.604-2  Determination of ``Finalists''.
1871.604-3  Discussions with ``Finalists''.
1871.604-4  Selection of ``Best Value'' Offer.
1871.605  Negotiation methods and procedures.
1871.606  Debriefings.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).

PART 1871--MIDRANGE PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES


1871.000  Scope of part.

    This part prescribes policies and procedures for the acquisition of 
supplies and services from commercial sources as a pilot test 
procurement program.

Subpart 1871.1--General


1871.101  Purpose.

    The purpose of this part is to establish policies and procedures 
that implement the MidRange procurement process. This will be a pilot 
test program at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
(NASA).


1871.102  Authority.

    The Office of Federal Procurement Policy has provided authority for 
NASA to conduct a pilot test of a new procurement process within the 
scope of this part.


1871.103  Applicability.

    (a) This part applies to all acquisitions, as described in 
1871.103(b), conducted at NASA installations.
    (b) This part applies to all contract actions, the aggregate amount 
of which is greater than the small purchase limitation ((FAR) 48 CFR 
Part 13) and not more than $500,000 in basic value. For service 
contracts (exclusive of R&D and construction for which options are not 
permitted), up to four annual options of not more than $500,000 each 
are permitted where the option requirements are substantially the same 
as the basic requirement. For supply contracts, four options of not 
more than $500,000 each are permitted when not more than $500,000 in 
funding is to be required in any fiscal year. The total amount of the 
basic award plus options may not exceed $2,500,000 in either the case 
of supplies or services except as provided in paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    (c) When the Government estimate for the basic award amount or any 
option amount, if any, exceeds the limits of 1871.103(b), the 
procurement will be processed under FAR and NFS procurement procedures 
applicable to large procurements (see (FAR) 48 CFR Parts 14 and 15). 
When the estimate is within the range of 1871.103(b) and the 
procurement was started using these procedures but the offered prices/
costs exceed the MidRange ceiling, the procurement may continue under 
MidRange procedures, provided that:
    (1) The price/cost can be determined to be fair and reasonable,
    (2) The successful offeror accepts incorporation of required FAR 
and NFS clauses applicable to large procurements, and
    (3) The procurement does not exceed $750,000 for the basic 
requirement (and each option, if any) or $3,750,000 for the total 
requirement.


1871.104  Definitions.

    The following terms are used throughout part 1871 as defined in 
this subpart.
    (a) NASA Acquisition Bulletin Board or NABB means an electronic 
bulletin board; i.e., a computer system through which users may access 
documents available in electronic format.
    (b) MidRange procurement procedure means a set of procedures within 
the authority of 1871.102 and the applicability of 1871.103.
    (c) Pilot test means a test of MidRange procurement procedures 
conducted within the authority of 1871.102 and applicability of 
1871.103.
    (d) Request for Offer (RFO) means the solicitation used to request 
offers for all authorized MidRange procurements.
    (e) Clarification and Discussion are used as defined in (FAR) 48 
CFR 15.601.
    (f) Negotiation is used as defined in (FAR) 48 CFR 15.101 and 
includes bargaining as described in (FAR) 48 CFR 15.102.


1871.105  Policy.

    (a) The procedures in this part shall be used for all procurements 
within the scope of part 1871 at NASA installations.
    (b) Under MidRange procedures, cost or pricing data and 
certification thereof shall be in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 15.804.
    (c) Procurements conducted under part 1871, unless otherwise 
properly restricted under the provisions of (FAR) 48 CFR part 6, are 
considered to be full and open competition after exclusion of sources 
in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 6.203, Set-asides for small business 
and labor surplus area concerns, or full and open competition in 
accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR part 6, subpart 6.1.
    (d) Options may be included in the acquisition provided they 
conform to 1871.103(b) or do not exceed $500,000 for the total 
requirement, options included.
    (e) The appropriate part 1871 post-selection processes 
(negotiation, award, and publication of award) may be used to the 
extent applicable for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), broad 
agency announcements, unsolicited proposals, and Small Business 
Administration 8(a) procurement actions within the applicability of 
1871.103(b). Notwithstanding the threshold requirements set forth in 
1871.103(b), SBIR Phase II contracts may be awarded in amounts not 
exceeding $750,000.
    (f) The NABB will be used to the maximum extent practicable to 
disseminate advance procurement information and conduct part 1871 
procurements.
    (g) Use of locally generated forms is encouraged where their use 
will contribute to the efficiency and economy of the process. NASA 
Forms 1667, Request for Offer, and 1668, Contract, or computer 
generated versions of these forms shall be used as the solicitation and 
contract cover sheets, respectively. Contractor generated forms or 
formats for solicitation response should be allowed whenever possible. 
There is no requirement for uniform formats (see (FAR) 48 CFR 15.406).

Subpart 1871.2--Planning and Requirements Process


1871.201  Use of buying team.

    MidRange procedures are based on the use of a buying team to 
conduct the procurement. The concept is to designate individuals who 
are competent in their respective functional areas, provide those 
individuals with the basic authority to conduct the procurement and 
hold them accountable for the results. The buying team will normally 
consist of one technical member and one procurement member, but may be 
augmented with additional members as necessary. Personnel providing 
normal functional assistance to the team (e.g., legal, financial) will 
not be considered a part of the team unless so designated. To function 
properly, the team should be given the maximum decision authority in 
matters related to the procurement. When higher level management 
approvals remain essential, it will be incumbent upon the functional 
team member to obtain such approvals. The team may accept, as final, 
the decision of the responsible buying team member.


1871.202  Organizational responsibilities.


1871.202-1  Requiring organization.

    The requirements organization shall appoint, by name, the technical 
member of the buying team. This individual will normally be an end user 
or the one most familiar with the technical aspects of the requirement. 
The individual appointed, whatever the relationship with the procured 
item, is expected to totally fulfill the responsibilities to the buying 
team. If the requiring organization elects not to appoint a technical 
member to the buying team, standard interfaces and authorities 
applicable to large procurements will be used. The procedures in this 
part will be used to the extent practical; however, priority will be 
afforded to procurements fully using buying teams.


1871.202-2  Procurement organization.

    The procurement organization shall appoint the procurement member 
of the buying team. This individual shall be a warranted contracting 
officer or a contract specialist with broad latitude to act for the 
contracting officer. The procurement member shall be the team leader 
with the ultimate responsibility to conduct the procurement.


1871.202-3  Supporting organizations.

    Buying team members may require additional team members to perform 
specialized functions or to assist in the evaluation of offers. 
Requests for supporting members shall be made by the organization 
identifying the need for the support and directed to the appropriate 
management level in the supporting organization. Supporting team 
members, once designated for the team, shall fulfill all applicable 
responsibilities to the team as other members.


1871.202-4  Center management.

    Center managers shall, to the maximum extent practical and 
consistent with their responsibilities to manage the Center mission, 
convey sufficient authority to members of the buying team to conduct 
the procurement. Administrative or technical approvals should be 
minimized, and where deemed essential, facilitated to the maximum 
extent practicable. Center managers should lend their full support to 
the buying team should problems arise from the procurement.


1871.203  Buying team responsibilities.

    (a) The buying team shall conduct the procurement in a manner that 
best satisfies the user requirements and meets the norms expected of a 
Government procurement. Team members should develop open 
communications, rely on decisions of other responsible functional team 
members and meet their obligations to the team. The team will 
typically--
    (1) Refine the final specifications for the solicitation;
    (2) Decide the most appropriate solicitation method;
    (3) Establish milestones for the procurement;
    (4) Finalize the evaluation criteria;
    (5) Develop the RFO and model contract; and
    (6) Evaluate offers and determine the awardee.
    (b) The procurement member of the buying team shall lead 
clarifications, discussions, and negotiations; shall be the source 
selection official; and shall conduct debriefings.


1871.204  Small business set-asides.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (e) of this 
section, each MidRange acquisition of supplies and services shall be 
reserved exclusively for small business concerns.
    (b) The requirement for small business MidRange set-asides does not 
relieve the buying office of its responsibility to procure from 
required sources of supply, such as Federal Prison Industries, 
Industries for the Blind and Other Severely Handicapped, and mandatory 
multiple award Federal Supply Schedule contracts.
    (c) Procurement not conducted as small business set-asides and 
under less than full and open competition require a Justification for 
Other than Full and Open Competition pursuant to (FAR) 48 CFR part 6.
    (d) If the buying team procurement member determines there is no 
reasonable expectation of obtaining offers from two or more responsible 
small business concerns that will be competitive in terms of market 
price, quality, and delivery, the buying team need not proceed with the 
small business set-aside and may purchase on an unrestricted basis 
utilizing MidRange procedures. The buying team procurement member shall 
document the contract file with the reason for the unrestricted 
procurement.
    (e) If the buying team proceeds with the small business MidRange 
set-aside and receives an offer from only one responsible small 
business concern at a reasonable price, the contracting officer will 
normally make an award to that concern. However, if the buying team 
does not receive a reasonable offer from a responsible small business 
concern, the buying team procurement member may cancel the small 
business set-aside and complete the procurement on an unrestricted 
basis utilizing MidRange procedures. The buying team procurement 
members shall document in the file the reason for the unrestricted 
purchase.
    (f) Each model contract under a small business MidRange set-aside 
shall contain the clause at (FAR) 48 CFR 52.219-6, Notice of Total 
Small Business Set-Aside.

Subpart 1871.3--Publicizing of Solicitation


1871.301  Publicizing policy.

    Use of the MidRange procedure is intended to streamline and 
expedite the acquisition process. Presolicitation publication 
requirements are streamlined; however, it is in the Government's 
interest to provide as much advance notice as possible of a pending 
acquisition in order for the Government to obtain maximum competition. 
As soon as practicable after a requirement has been finalized and 
before the RFO is ready for release, a presolicitation notice of the 
procurement action shall be published on the NABB.


1871.302  Publicizing procedure.

    (a) Synopses are not to be sent or published in the Commerce 
Business Daily.
    (b) A separate pre-solicitation notice for each requirement shall 
be published on the NABB. The pre-solicitation notice shall be 
published prior to the actual release of the solicitation.
    (c) The presolicitation notice will comply with the requirements 
set forth in (FAR) 48 CFR 5.207(b).
    (1) Include a statement that the solicitation will be released via 
the NABB, that potential offerors will be responsible for downloading 
their own copy of the solicitation, and that hard copies of the 
solicitation shall be made available on request, but the closing date 
will be the same as that required for the NABB released solicitation; 
and
    (2) State the projected solicitation release date, provide notice 
that it is the offeror's responsibility to monitor the NABB for 
solicitation release as the solicitation will be released as soon as 
permissible whether prior or subsequent to the projected date, and 
identify the name, telephone number, and e-mail address of a point of 
contact. The presolicitation notice shall be updated to reflect 
significant changes to the original notice.

Subpart 1871.4--Request for Offer (RFO)

    In MidRange procedures, solicitation of sources shall be 
accomplished by use of an RFO. The RFO will be solely a solicitation 
document incorporating only those elements of information required to 
solicit the offer. Offers will be provided on a model contract 
furnished with the RFO.


1871.401  Types of RFO'S.

    The RFO may be used for all types of procurements to which MidRange 
is applicable. The distinguishing difference will be the evaluation and 
award criteria specified in the RFO. This, in turn, will be driven by 
the buying team's decisions on the extent of discussion required, the 
amount of non-price factors that will influence the award and the 
amount of competition available. If the conditions in (FAR) 48 CFR 
6.401(a) are met, the RFO's described in 1871.401-1 and 1871.401-2 
shall be used; otherwise, RFO's described in 1871.401-3, 1871.401-4, or 
1871.401-5 may be used. Once the evaluation and award criteria have 
been specified in the RFO, the procurement must conform to the 
procedures applicable to these criteria, unless changed by formal 
amendment to the RFO.


1871.401-1  Sealed Offers.

    (a) Policy. RFO's may specify that award will be made to the low, 
responsive, responsible offeror providing the most advantageous offer 
considering only price and price-related factors. This method shall be 
used when (1) time permits the solicitation, submission, and evaluation 
of sealed offers; (2) award will be made on the basis of price and 
other price-related factors; (3) conducting discussions with the 
offerors is not necessary; and (4) a reasonable expectation of 
receiving more that one offer exists. The RFO shall be in compliance 
with the requirements of (FAR) 48 CFR part 14 relating to Sealed 
Bidding.
    (b) Procedures. (1) The RFO shall request offerors to provide both 
a technical and price offer by the closing date specified.
    (2) In accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR Part 14, offers (whether 
received by facsimile or sealed envelope delivery) shall be publicly 
opened at the designated time and place. Interested members of the 
public will be permitted to attend the opening. Offers shall be 
abstracted pursuant to (FAR) 48 CFR part 14 and be available for public 
inspection. For unclassified acquisitions, a summary abstract, 
containing offerors, prices and any essential information specific to 
that procurement shall be posted on the NABB. The abstract shall be 
included in the contract file.
    (3) All offers shall be examined for mistakes in accordance with 
(FAR) 48 CFR 14.406. The buying team shall determine that a prospective 
contractor is responsible and that the prices offered are reasonable 
(see (FAR) 48 CFR 14.407-2).
    (4) The Government will award a contract to the low, responsive, 
responsible offeror, whose offer conforms to the RFO and will be most 
advantageous to the Government, considering only price and the price-
related factors included in the solicitation


1871.401-2  Two-Step competitive procurement.

    (a) Policy. (1) RFO's may specify that evaluation and award may be 
conducted in two distinct steps, similar in concept to ``Two Step 
Sealed Bidding.'' The MidRange Two Step process should be used when it 
is desirable to award to the lowest, responsive, responsible offeror 
after determining that the initial technical offer, or the revised 
technical offer, is acceptable.
    (2) The procedures of (FAR) 48 CFR 14.503-2(a) shall be used once 
Step two of this process begins.
    (b) Procedures. (1) The RFO shall request offerors to provide both 
a technical and a price offer by the closing date specified. Price 
offers are requested to ensure that they are accomplished in a timely 
manner and to reduce the time required for Step Two.
    (2) Step One. The technical offer will be evaluated to determine if 
the product or service offered is acceptable. The buying team may 
proceed directly to Step Two if there are sufficient acceptable offers 
to ensure adequate price competition, and if further time, effort and 
delay to make additional offers acceptable and thereby increase 
competition would not be in the Government's interest. If this is not 
the case, the buying team procurement member shall enter into 
discussions and request offeror(s) whose offer(s) is susceptible to 
being made acceptable to submit additional clarifying or supplementing 
information to make it acceptable (see (FAR) 48 CFR 14.503-1). It is 
expected that these discussions will be conducted on an informal basis. 
After completion of discussions, the buying team shall proceed to Step 
Two.
    (3) Step Two. The buying team shall afford all offerors who have 
submitted acceptable offers and those offers with whom discussions were 
conducted, an opportunity, by a common date, to revise their price 
offers. No changes to technical offers will be permitted during this 
process. A reasonable amount of time (normally less than 5 working 
days) will be afforded for the revision. The amount of time given shall 
be the same for each offeror. The procedures at 1871.401-1(b)(2) and 
(3) shall then be followed.
    (4) The Government will award a contract to the low, responsive, 
responsible offeror, whose offer conforms to the RFO and will be most 
advantageous to the Government, considering only price and the price-
related factors included in the solicitation.


1871.401-3  Competitive negotiated procurement not using qualitative 
criteria.

    (a) Policy. (1) RFO's may provide for discussion of all aspects of 
the offer but award is based on the lowest priced (or most probable 
cost) technically acceptable offer. This method should be used when 
qualitative factors are not material in the award decision, but it is 
important to assure that technical offers and contract terms are fully 
compliant with the Government's needs. This method also permits direct 
discussion of price with offerors and is particularly appropriate when 
different approaches can be offered to satisfy the Government's need.
    (2) The RFO should reserve the right to award without discussion 
based on the initial offers submitted. (FAR) 48 CFR 52.215-16, 
Alternate III will be included in all RFO's for competitive negotiated 
procurements not using qualitative criteria.
    (b) Procedures. (1) The RFO shall request offerors to provide both 
a technical and a price offer by the closing date specified.
    (2) Initial evaluation. The offer shall be reviewed to determine if 
all required information has been provided. No further evaluation shall 
be made of any offer that is deemed unacceptable because it does not 
meet the technical requirements of the RFO and is not reasonably 
susceptible to being made so. Offerors may be contacted for 
clarification purposes only during the initial evaluation. Offerors 
determined not to be acceptable shall be notified of their rejection 
and the reasons therefor and excluded from further consideration. 
Documentation for such rejection should consist of one or more succinct 
statements of fact that show the offer is not acceptable. No 
documentation is required if all offers are deemed to be acceptable or 
reasonably susceptible to being made so.
    (3) Determination of finalists. From among the acceptable offers 
and those susceptible to being made acceptable, the buying team shall 
rank the offers based on price (or most probable cost) and exclude any 
whose price/most probable cost precludes any reasonable chance of being 
selected for final award. The remaining offers constitute the 
``finalists'' for the contract. Only in exceptional cases will this 
number be less than two offers. The procurement buying team member 
shall succinctly record the basis for the decision.
    (4) Discussions. Discussions may be used if it is necessary to 
request the offeror to submit additional clarifying or supplementing 
information to make an offer acceptable. The procurement buying team 
member shall lead discussions with each finalist. The discussions are 
intended to assist the buying team in fully understanding each 
finalist's offer and to assure that all finalists are competing equally 
on the basis intended. Care must be exercised to ensure these 
discussions adhere, to the extent applicable, to the guidelines set 
forth in 1815.613-71(b)(5) for the applicable contract type. Technical 
transfusion, technical leveling, and auction techniques are prohibited. 
It is expected that discussions will be conducted on an informal basis 
with each finalist. After completion of discussions, each finalist 
shall be afforded an opportunity to revise its offer to support and 
clarify its offer. A reasonable amount of time (normally less than 5 
working days) will be afforded for the revision. The amount of time 
given shall be the same for each finalist. Such discussions are not 
required if there are sufficient acceptable offers to ensure adequate 
price competition, and if further time, effort and delay to make 
additional proposals acceptable and thereby increase competition, would 
not be in the Government's interest.
    (5) The buying team may choose to conduct parallel negotiations 
with all acceptable offerors without a determination of finalists. This 
could particularly apply when few offers were received.
    (6) Selection. The procurement team member shall be the source 
selection official. The source selection official may elect to make 
selection in lieu of determining finalists provided that it can be 
demonstrated that (i) selection of an initial offer(s) will result in 
the lowest price/cost to the Government and (ii) discussions with other 
acceptable offerors are not anticipated to change the outcome of the 
initial evaluation relative to evaluated price/cost. It is expected 
that the source selection statement will not ordinarily exceed one page 
and that the basis for the decision will be apparent upon review of the 
informal worksheets used in the evaluation process. These informal 
worksheets shall be included in the contract file.
    (7) The names of offerors determined to be finalists, selected for 
parallel negotiations, or selected for negotiations and/or final 
contract award will be electronically transmitted to the offerors. This 
will serve as notification to those offers that were not selected for 
further evaluation (see 1871.505).
    (8) Negotiation methods and procedures. The buying team may choose 
to conduct parallel negotiations of complete contracts with those 
offerors determined to be finalists or with all acceptable offerors, 
including offers susceptible to being made acceptable. The buying team 
may discuss any aspect of the offer during parallel negotiations. The 
objective of the negotiations should be to achieve revisions to the 
offer, consistent with the RFO, that are more favorable to the 
Government. Technical transfusion, technical levelling, and auction 
techniques are prohibited. Upon conclusion of negotiations with each 
offeror, the offeror shall be asked to submit a revised offer (in full 
or amended) reflecting the results of negotiations, and including the 
offeror's signature on the negotiated contract. A reasonable amount of 
time (normally less than 5 working days) will be afforded for the 
revision. Award will be made to the lowest priced (or most probable 
cost), technically acceptable offer.


1871.401-4  Competitive negotiations using qualitative criteria.

    (a) Policy. (1) MidRange procurements shall normally use the BVS 
source selection method, prescribed in 48 CFR part 1871, subpart 1871.6 
when it is desirable to base evaluation and award on a combination of 
price and non-price qualitative criteria.
    (2) The RFO should reserve the right to award without discussion 
based on the initial offers submitted. (FAR) 48 CFR 52.215-16, 
Alternate III will be included in all RFO's for competitive negotiated 
procurements using qualitative criteria.
    (3) In exceptionally complex procurements where it is desirable to 
use a highly structured approach and multiple evaluators, a source 
selection method following the principles specified in NASA Source 
Evaluation Board Handbook, 48 CFR 1870.303, Appendix I, may be more 
appropriate than BVS. This may be appropriate in cases in which the 
following factors cannot be accommodated within the MidRange/BVS 
selection methodology:
    (i) The ability to predefine the value characteristics that will 
constitute the discriminators among the offers;
    (ii) The complexity of the interrelationships that must be 
evaluated;
    (iii) The number of evaluators required to address the disciplines 
that will be involved in the offers; or
    (iv) The impact that the procurement may have on higher level 
mission management (level of selection official) or future 
procurements.
    (4) A source selection process combining the mid-range and the NASA 
Source Evaluation Board Handbook (48 CFR 1870.303, Appendix I) 
approaches shall not be used.
    (b) Procedures. (1) The buying team will determine which of the 
source selection methodologies is most appropriate to the specific 
procurement.
    (2) The team shall record its rationale for selecting the SEB 
methodology rather than BVS. Once this decision is made, the team shall 
no longer function as a MidRange buying team, but shall follow the 
instructions prescribed in the local procedures for the source 
selection method.


1871.401-5  Noncompetitive negotiations.

    (a) Policy. (1) The RFO may be used as the solicitation method for 
noncompetitive procurements.
    (2) MidRange procedures may be used in noncompetitive acquisitions 
to the extent they are applicable.
    (b) Procedures. (1) Posting a presolicitation notice on the NABB 
meets the requirement of (FAR) 48 CFR 5.201 and complies with the 
notice required by the Competition in Contracting Act. A 
presolicitation notice is not required if one of the exceptions of 
(FAR) 48 CFR 5.202 is met.
    (2) The buying team shall require submission of certified cost and 
pricing data in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 15.804-2.
    (3) The technical member of the buying team shall provide technical 
assistance to the procurement member during evaluation and negotiation 
of the contractor's offer.


1871.402  Preparation of the RFO.

    (a) The RFO shall provide all standard information required for the 
offeror to submit an offer.
    (b) The RFO shall contain space for all necessary additional 
instructions to offerors. As a minimum, the RFO shall contain the 
following:
    (1) Incorporation by reference of all required standard provisions.
    (2) A provision notifying offerors that standard Representations 
and Certifications will be required from the successful offeror, or 
from all offerors selected for parallel negotiations, prior to award of 
the contract.
    (3) Evaluation and award criteria.
    (4) A provision requiring offerors to submit offers on an attached 
model contract.
    (c) Requirements for the content and format of the offer should be 
the minimum required to provide for proper evaluation. Offerors' 
formats should be allowed to the maximum extent possible.
    (d) Facsimile offers, defined by Federal Acquisition Regulation 48 
CFR 14.202-7 and 15.402(i), shall normally be authorized for MidRange 
procurements. In special circumstances, the buying team may elect to 
require only original offers.


1871.403  Offer preparation period and limitations.

    The buying team should establish deadlines for receipt of offers 
based on an assessment of the minimum amount of time required to 
respond to the solicitation. The time required will depend on the 
complexity of the requirement and amount of cost and technical 
information required to be submitted. The information required shall be 
limited to the amount required to conduct a proper evaluation. The 
offer preparation period established in the RFO shall not be less than 
15 calendar days unless the procurement is urgent and the reasons for 
urgency are documented in the contract file.


1871.404  Protection of offers.

    A facsimile machine(s) shall be dedicated for receipt of offers and 
placed in a secure location where offers received on it can be 
safeguarded. All offers submitted shall be recorded, sealed in an 
envelope marked with the RFO number and taken to the buying team 
procurement member. Facsimile attendants shall make a good faith effort 
to inspect the document for completeness and legibility. If the 
attendant believes there are missing or illegible pages, the document 
will be promptly referred to the buying team procurement member for 
notification to the offeror that it should resubmit the offer. The 
Government shall not assume responsibility for proper transmission.


1871.405  Model contract.

    MidRange procedures use a simplified contract format. The 
simplified contract format may be used with any type of contract, as 
long as the clauses and provisions appropriate to the contract type are 
included.


1871.406  RFO by electronic bulletin board.


1871.406-1  Methods of disseminating information.

    (a) In accordance with 1871.302, presolicitation notices of 
solicitations for MidRange procurements shall be posted on the NABB. 
The presolicitation notice shall include the information required by 
1871.302(c).
    (b) Solicitations for MidRange Procurements shall be made available 
on the NABB. Paper copies shall be mailed within 5 working days from 
the date the RFO is posted on the NABB or receipt of the request, 
whichever is later.
    (c) Solicitations available on the NABB are exempt from the 
requirement in (FAR) 48 CFR 14.203-1 that delivery of the solicitations 
be made pursuant to (FAR) 48 CFR 14.205.
    (d) For the purposes of (FAR) 48 CFR 15.402(a), a solicitation 
posted on the NABB is a written solicitation.
    (e) Solicitations posted on the NABB in accordance with these 
regulations are exempt from the requirement in (FAR) 48 CFR 15.408(a) 
to issue solicitations using the procedures in (FAR) 48 CFR Part 5.


1871.406-2  Special situations.

    Notices for special situations as described in (FAR) 48 CFR 5.205 
involving MidRange Procurements must be published in the Commerce 
Business Daily. Such special situations include R&D sources sought, 
intent to sponsor or change the mission of an Federally Funded Research 
and Development Center, effort to locate commercial sources under OMB 
Circular No. A-76, and Section 8(a) competitive national buy 
acquisitions.


1871.406-3  Publicizing and response time.

    In accordance with 18.403, contracting activities shall allow at 
least 15 calendar days response time for receipt of offers from the 
date of posting of the solicitation on the NABB. Contracting activities 
shall check the NABB immediately after uploading a solicitation to 
assure that the solicitation is properly posted.


1871.406-4  Method of soliciting offers.

    (a) Solicitations and solicitation amendments for MidRange 
procurements shall be generated in, or converted to, electronic files 
and uploaded to the NABB. Each contracting activity will designate two 
or more individuals to perform the upload and check the uploaded files 
to assure that the data was not corrupted during transmission.
    (b) Amendments to a solicitation posted on the NABB shall be 
uploaded to the NABB, and the solicitation and amendment number shall 
be added to the index of amended solicitations.

Subpart 1871.5--Award


1871.501  Representations and certifications.

    Upon determination of the successful offeror, or all offerors 
selected for parallel negotiations, the buying team procurement member 
will determine if the offeror has on file valid Representations and 
Certifications. If the offeror has not completed the required forms, or 
they have expired, the offeror will be requested to provide the forms 
promptly. Should the offeror fail to provide the required 
Representations and Certifications or fail to meet a required 
condition, the buying team may reject the offer and proceed to the next 
highest ranked offeror who is responsive and responsible.


1871.502  Determination of responsible contractor.

    Contractor responsibility shall be determined in accordance with 
(FAR) 48 CFR Part 9.


1871.503  Negotiation documentation.

    The prenegotiation memorandum, if required, and the results of 
negotiation will be in abbreviated form and will be approved by the 
buying team.


1871.504  Award documents.

    Contract award shall be accomplished by Contracting Officer 
execution of the contract document and providing a paper copy to the 
successful offeror. If facsimile documents were used in the evaluation 
process, the successful offeror may be required to execute original 
copies of the contract to facilitate legibility during the 
administration phase of the contract.


1871.505  Notifications to unsuccessful offerors.

    For solicitations that were posted on the NABB, a preaward notice 
shall be electronically transmitted to the offerors. This notice meets 
the requirements of (FAR) 48 CFR 15.1001. However, the preaward notice 
in a small business set-aside must allow unsuccessful offerors 5 
working days to challenge the small business status of the successful 
offeror. The procedures of (FAR) 48 CFR 15.1001(c)(2) shall be followed 
for procurements subject to the Trade Agreements Act.


1871.506  Publication of award.

An award notice shall be posted on the NABB for seven (7) calendar days 
after posting, if the contract offers subcontracting opportunities or 
if it is subject to the Trade Agreement Act. The information required 
by (FAR) 48 CFR 5.207 shall be included in the award notice in 
abbreviated form.


1871.507  Debriefing of unsuccessful offerors.

    If the procurement method used provides for a debriefing of 
unsuccessful offerors, the procedures applicable to that selection 
process shall be used in the debriefing. The procurement buying team 
member shall conduct debriefings.

Subpart 1871.6--``Best Value Selection''


1871.601  General.

    (a) Best Value Selection (BVS) seeks to select an offer based on 
the best combination of price and qualitative merit of the offers 
submitted and reduce the administrative burden on the offerors and the 
Government.
    (b) BVS takes advantage of the lower complexity of MidRange 
procurements and predefines the value characteristics which will serve 
as the discriminators among offers. It eliminates the use of area 
evaluation factors and the highly structured scoring.


1871.602  Specifications for MidRange procurements.

    BVS refines the traditional approach to preparing specifications. 
BVS envisions that the specification will focus on the end result that 
is to be achieved and will serve as a statement of the Government's 
baseline requirements. The offeror will be guided in meeting the 
Government's needs by a separate set of value characteristics which 
establish what the Government considers to be valuable in an offer. 
These value characteristics will be performance based and will permit 
the selection of the offer which provides better results for a 
reasonable marginal increase in price.


1871.603  Establishment of evaluation criteria.

    (a) The requiring organization will provide, along with the 
specification, a list of value characteristics against which the offers 
will be judged. There is no limit to the number or the type of 
characteristics that may be specified. The only standard will be 
whether the characteristic is rationally related to the need specified 
in the specification. Characteristics may include such factors as 
improved reliability, innovativeness of ideas, speed of service, 
demonstrated delivery performance, higher speeds, ease of use, 
qualifications of personnel, solutions to operating problems, level of 
service provided on previous similar contracts, or any of numerous 
other characteristics that may be of value to the Government in 
satisfying its needs.
    (b) Cost and technical will be considered equal in importance. The 
value characteristics will not be assigned weights.
    (c) All subsequent evaluations will consider these characteristics 
when determining the finalists or making the final selection for award. 
Additional characteristics, not listed in the RFO, shall not be used as 
a basis for discriminating among proposals.


1871.604  Evaluation phases.


1871.604-1  Initial evaluation.

    (a) Offers will be reviewed to determine if all required 
information has been provided and the offeror has made a reasonable 
attempt to present an acceptable offer. Offerors may be contacted only 
for clarification purposes during the initial evaluation. No further 
evaluation shall be made of any offer that is deemed unacceptable 
because:
    (1) It does not represent a reasonable effort to address itself to 
the essential requirements of the RFO or clearly demonstrates that the 
offeror does not understand the requirements of the RFO;
    (2) It contains major technical or business deficiencies or 
omissions or out-of-line costs which discussions with the offeror could 
not reasonably be expected to cure; or
    (3) In R&D procurement, a substantial design drawback is evident in 
the offer and sufficient correction or improvement to consider the 
offer acceptable would require virtually an entirely new offer.
    (b) Offerors determined not to be acceptable shall be notified of 
their rejection and the reasons therefor and excluded from further 
consideration.
    (c) Documentation. If it is concluded that all offers are 
acceptable, then no documentation is required and evaluation proceeds. 
If one or more offers are not acceptable, the procurement member of the 
team will notify the offeror of the rejection and the reasons therefor. 
The documentation should consist of one or more succinct statements of 
fact that show the offer is not acceptable.


1871.604-2  Determination of ``Finalists''.

    (a) All acceptable offers will be evaluated against the 
specifications and the value characteristics. Based on this evaluation, 
the team will identify the finalists from among the offers submitted. 
Finalists will include all offers having a reasonable chance of being 
selected for final award, as prescribed in 1815.613-71(b)(4)(i) for 
competitive range. Generally, finalists will include the offer having 
the best price (or lowest most probable cost) and the offer having the 
highest qualitative merit, plus those determined to have the best 
combination of price and merit. Offers not qualifying as finalists will 
be excluded from the balance of the evaluation process.
    (b) Whenever possible, the buying team will conduct parallel 
negotiations of complete contracts with all finalists as discussed in 
1871.605. This approach, which provide for the negotiation of 
definitive contracts prior to selection, serves to maintain the 
competitive environment among offerors throughout the acquisition 
cycle.
    (c) In some cases, the buying team may choose to conduct 
discussions with the finalists as opposed to conducting parallel 
negotiations of complete contracts. This may be appropriate when: (1) 
Certain aspects of offers are unclear and clarifying the offers could 
determine that a finalist actually has no reasonable chance of being 
selected for final award; or (2) the finalists are so numerous that 
negotiating complete contracts with all finalists is not practical 
considering the time and resources available. Discussions shall be 
conducted in accordance with 1871.604-3.
    (d) The buying team may choose to conduct parallel negotiations 
with all acceptable offerors without a determination of finalists. This 
could particularly apply where few offers were received.
    (e) The selection official may elect to make selection in lieu of 
determining finalists, provided it can be clearly demonstrated that (1) 
selection of an initial offer(s) will result in the best value for the 
Government, considering both price and non-price qualitative criteria; 
and (2) discussions with other acceptable offerors are not anticipated 
to change the outcome of the initial evaluation relative to the best 
value offer(s).
    (f) Documentation. If finalists are identified as discussed in 
paragraph (a) of this section, the documentation expected and required 
to result from this phase of evaluation is approximately one-quarter of 
a page for each finalist. The documentation shall succinctly describe 
how the value characteristics in the RFO were provided by the offeror 
and cost/price considerations that caused the offer to qualify as a 
finalist. The evaluator(s) shall not be required to justify why other 
offers provided less qualitative merit. It is expected that, should the 
decision be challenged, the documented reason for selection, when 
compared with the non-selected offer, shall clearly demonstrate the 
difference that resulted in non-selection. It is expected and 
recommended that all informal worksheets used in the evaluation process 
be included in the contract file for use in any debriefings requested. 
When selection of the successful offeror(s) is made, the buying team 
shall document the selection in accordance with 1871.604-4(c).
    (g) The names of offerors determined to be finalists, selected for 
parallel negotiations, or selected for negotiations or final contract 
award will be electronically transmitted to the offerors. This will 
serve as notification to those offerors that were not selected for 
further evaluation (see 1871.505).


1871.604-3  Discussions with ``Finalists''.

    (a) The procurement team member shall lead discussions with each 
finalist. The discussions are intended to assist the buying team in 
fully understanding each finalist's offer and to assure that the 
meanings and points of emphasis of the RFO have been adequately 
conveyed to the finalists so that all are competing equally on the 
basis intended. Care must be exercised to ensure these discussions 
adhere, to the extent applicable, to the guidelines set forth in 
1815.613-71(b)(5) for the applicable contract type. Technical 
transfusion, technical leveling, and auction techniques are prohibited. 
It is expected that these discussions will be conducted on an informal 
basis with each finalist.
    (b) After completion of discussions, each finalist shall be 
afforded an opportunity to revise its offer to support and clarify its 
offer. A reasonable amount of time (normally less than 5 working days) 
will be afforded for the revision. The amount of time given shall be 
the same for each finalist.


1871.604-4  Selection of ``Best Value'' Offer.

    (a) The procurement team member shall be the source selection 
official.
    (b) The BVS source selection is based on the premise that, if all 
offers are of approximately equal qualitative merit, award will be made 
to the offer with the lowest evaluated price (fixed-price contracts) or 
the Government-determined most probable cost (cost type contracts). 
However, the Government will consider awarding to an offeror with 
higher qualitative merit if the difference in price is commensurate 
with added value. Conversely, the Government will consider making award 
to an offeror whose offer has lower qualitative merit if the price (or 
cost) differential between it and other offers warrant doing so.
    (c) Documentation. Rationale for selection of the successful 
offeror shall be recorded in a selection statement which succinctly 
records the value characteristics upon which selection was made. The 
statement need not and should not reveal details of the successful 
offer that are proprietary or business sensitive. Since the value 
characteristics are expressed in performance terms, the reasons for 
selection can focus on results to be achieved, rather than the detailed 
approach the offeror will use. The statement shall also comment on the 
rationale used to equate cost and qualitative merit. Little or no 
comment would be required when the selected offeror possessed the 
highest merit and lowest price. When a marginal analysis is made 
between value characteristics and price (or cost)--in most cases this 
will be a subjective, integrated assessment of all pertinent factors--
specific rationale should be provided to the extent possible. It is 
expected that the statement will not ordinarily exceed one page. Where 
the procurement is closely contested, it would be prudent to expand on 
the rationale provided in the statement.
    (d) The name of the offeror(s) selected for award and the selection 
statement shall be electronically transmitted to the offerors which 
will serve as a notification to those offerors that were not selected 
(see 1871.505).


1871.605  Negotiation methods and procedures.

    (a) Policy. (1) The buying team may choose to conduct parallel 
negotiations of complete contracts with those offerors determined to be 
finalists or with all acceptable offerors. Parallel negotiation may 
also be used where more than one offeror is selected for negotiations 
after discussions. Use of parallel negotiations takes advantage of the 
competitive atmosphere and the responsiveness of offerors in completing 
negotiations. It also provides the selection official a higher 
confidence in the offer, since only the contracting officer's signature 
is required to make the offer a binding contract.
    (2) When the selection official has chosen to make selection in 
lieu of conducting parallel negotiations, negotiations may be conducted 
with the successful offeror(s) to resolve any open issues necessary to 
effect a binding contract(s). This may be typical of R&D and service 
contracts where the Government desires to negotiate changes in emphasis 
or orientation in an otherwise superior offer(s).
    (b) Procedure. (1) Upon conclusion of parallel negotiations with 
each offeror, the offeror shall be asked to submit a revised offer (in 
full or amended) reflecting the results of the negotiations, and 
including the offeror's signature on the negotiated contract. A 
reasonable amount of time (normally less than 5 working days) will be 
afforded for the revision. The amount of time given shall be the same 
for each offeror. Upon receipt of all offers, the procurement member of 
the buying team shall make selection and document as required in 
1871.604-4(c). Upon selection, the contracting officer shall execute 
the selected contract.
    (2) If negotiation is conducted after selection, the buying team 
shall first select the offer and document as required in 1871.604-4(c), 
then negotiate the terms of the contract. The offeror shall be asked to 
submit a revised offer reflecting the results of negotiation, and 
including the offeror's signature on the negotiated contract. A 
reasonable amount of time (normally less than 5 working days) will be 
afforded for the revision. After receipt of the revised offer, the 
contracting officer shall execute the contract.


1871.606  Debriefings.

    In addition to electronically transmitting the selection statement 
to the offerors, a debriefing, a debriefing will be provided by the 
buying team procurement member to any offeror submitting a written 
request. The debriefing will concentrate on the reasons why the 
successful offeror was selected. If the contract is unclassified, the 
debriefer may reveal any aspect of the contract and how it relates to 
the merits used to select the successful offer. If the successful offer 
had value characteristics which are proprietary or business sensitive, 
and had an impact on the selection, the debriefer should so state and 
summarize the results which are expected to accrue to the Government. 
The debriefer shall not divulge the details of the proprietary or 
business sensitive information.

[FR Doc. 94-28169 Filed 11-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M