[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70208-70209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32658]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Parts 1815, 1819, and 1852
Elimination of Elements as a Category in Evaluations
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule proposes to amend the NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) by
eliminating the term ``elements'' as a category in evaluations. NASA
does not numerically weight and score ``elements'' and therefore they
have ceased to have significance in the evaluation and award of NASA's
contracts.
DATES: Comments should be submitted on or before February 14, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties should submit written comments to Paul
Brundage, NASA Headquarters, Office of Procurement, Contract Management
Division (Code HK), Washington, DC 20456. Comments may also be
submitted by e-mail to [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Brundage, (202) 358-0481.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
NASA does not numerically weight and score ``elements'' and
therefore they have ceased to have significance in the evaluation and
award of NASA's contracts. This proposed change will eliminate the term
``element'' as a category in evaluations from NFS Parts 1815, 1819, and
1852.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
NASA certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small business entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
because the change modifies administrative procedures and does not
impose any new requirements on offerors or contractors.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because the changes to
the NFS do not impose record keeping or information collection
requirements, or collections of information from offerors, contractors,
or members of the public which require the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
Lists of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1815, 1819, and 1852
Government procurement.
Tom Luedtke,
Associate Administrator for Procurement.
Accordingly, 48 CFR Parts 1815, 1819, and 1852 are proposed to be
amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Parts 1815, 1819, and 1852
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
PART 1815--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION
2. In section 1815.303, paragraph (b)(i)(A) is amended by removing
the words ``and elements,''.
3. In section 1815.304-70, paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised to
read as follows:
1815.304-70 NASA evaluation factors.
(a) Typically, NASA establishes three evaluation factors: Mission
Suitability, Cost/Price, and Past Performance. Evaluation factors may
be further defined by subfactors. Evaluation subfactors should be
structured to identify significant discriminators, or ``key
swingers''--the essential information required to support a source
selection decision. Too many subfactors undermine effective proposal
evaluation. All evaluation subfactors should be clearly defined to
avoid overlap and redundancy.
(b) Mission Suitability factor.
(1) This factor indicates the merit or excellence of the work to be
performed or product to be delivered. It includes, as appropriate, both
technical and management subfactors. Mission Suitability shall be
numerically weighted and scored on a 1000-point scale.
(2) The Mission Suitability factor may identify evaluation
subfactors to further define the content of the factor. Each Mission
Suitability subfactor shall be weighted and scored. The adjectival
rating percentages in 1815.305(a)(3)(A) shall be applied to the
subfactor weight to determine the point score. The number of Mission
Suitability subfactors is limited to five. The Mission Suitability
evaluation subfactors and their weights shall be identified in the RFP.
(3) For cost reimbursement acquisitions, the Mission Suitability
evaluation shall also include the results of any cost realism analysis.
The RFP shall notify offerors that the realism of proposed costs may
significantly affect their Mission Suitability scores.
* * * * *
4. In section 1815.370, paragraphs (b), (d)(4), and (h)(2) are
revised; paragraphs (h)(3)(ii) is amended by removing ``elements,'';
paragraph (i)(3) is amended by removing ``and elements,''; and
paragraphs (i)(6)(ii) and (i)(7) are revised to read as follows:
1815.370 NASA source evaluation boards.
* * * * *
(b) The SEB assists the SSA by providing expert analyses of the
offerors' proposals in relation to the evaluation factors and
subfactors contained in the solicitation. The SEB will prepare and
present its findings to the SSA, avoiding trade-off judgments among
either the individual offerors or among the evaluation factors. The SEB
will not make recommendations for selection to the SSA.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) An SEB committee functions as a factfinding arm of the SEB,
usually in a broad grouping of related disciplines (e.g., technical or
management). The committee evaluates in detail each proposal, or
portion thereof, assigned by the SEB in accordance with the approved
evaluation factors and subfactors and summarizes its evaluation in a
written report to the SEB. The committee will also respond to
requirements assigned by the SEB, including further justification or
reconsideration of its findings. Committee chairpersons shall manage
the administrative and procedural matters of their committees.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) The presentation shall focus on the significant strengths,
deficiencies, and significant weaknesses found in the proposals, the
probable cost of each proposal, and any significant issues and
[[Page 70209]]
problems identified by the SEB. This presentation must explain any
applicable special standards of responsibility; evaluation factors and
subfactors; the significant strengths and significant weaknesses of the
offerors; the Government cost estimate, if applicable; the offerors'
proposed cost/price; the probable cost; the proposed fee arrangements;
and the final adjectival ratings and scores to the subfactor level.
(i) * * *
(6) * * *
(ii) Directly relate the significant strengths, deficiencies, and
significant weaknesses to the evaluation factors and subfactors.
* * * * *
(7) Final Mission Suitability Ratings and Scores. Summarizes the
evaluation subfactors, the maximum points achievable, and the scores of
the offerors in the competitive range.
* * * * *
PART 1819--SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS
5. In section 1819.7206, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the
words ``or element''.
PART 1852--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
6. In section 1852.217-71, ``(OCTOBER 1998)'' is revised to read
``(MONTH/YEAR)'', and paragraph (g) is amended by removing the words
``and elements''.
7. In section 1852.217-72, ``(OCTOBER 1998)'' is revised to read
``(MONTH/YEAR)'', and paragraph (g) is amended by removing the words
``and elements''.
[FR Doc. 99-32658 Filed 12-15-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P