C-5_Draft_RFP_addendum.docx

This is an addendum to the previously posted response to Draft RFP questions concerning No Bid Actions

Addendum:

After much more deliberation and review, in order for the basic premise of the Best Value Price-Performance trade-off to function, all contractors MUST be on equal ground. Allowing No Bid Actions during the initial Best Value determination phase would serve to decrease a contractor’s TEP while those who propose on all would have a higher TEP. The overall TEP is used as a data point when deciding applicable trade-off for determining overall Best Value. As this is not all or none, once the Best Value determination is made, individual NSNs will be assigned to the low Best Value offeror.

For items which may have been considered for no-bids, there are other ways to fulfill the need based on the current available market.

Initial:

The only issue we currently have with the draft is the language contained in H903, Contractor “No Bid” Actions. It would appear that the government is forcing contractors into an all or nothing situation with this language in spite of the language contained within H901 that states “Award will not be made on an aggregate low price as an all or none award”. I realize this is speaking to individual NSN’s but it also seems to be in contradiction based on a firm’s desire to not bid items which are outside they’re manufacturing envelope / capabilities. We have no issue with providing reasoning for No Bids as required by H-903 but it would appear that the acceptance or rejection of those reasons would be subjective in nature depending greatly on the person reviewing the reason(s) given.

The clause will be revised. While I would still like for all NSNs to be proposed upon, there will be no penalty for a no bid. As this is not all or none, the total amount is strictly a data point.