§ 1515.608 - Proposal evaluation.

(a) The initial technical evaluations of proposals shall be conducted in accordance with the following procedures.

(1) The evaluation of technical proposals (including past performance factors) shall be accomplished using the following scoring plan or one specifically developed for the solicitation, e.g., other numeric, adjectival or color rating systems. Contracting Officers may request that the TEP also indicate whether proposals are acceptable or unacceptable, and/or whether the offerors’ responses to individual criteria are acceptable or unacceptable.

Scoring PlanValueDescriptive statement0 The factor is not addressed, or is totally deficient and without merit.1 The factor is addressed, but contains deficiencies and/or weaknesses that can be corrected only by major or significant changes to relevant portions of the proposal, or the factor is addressed so minimally or vaguely that there are widespread information gaps. In addition, because of the deficiencies, weaknesses, and/or information gaps, serious concerns exist on the part of the TEP about the offeror's ability to perform the required work.2 Information related to the factor is incomplete, unclear, or indicates an inadequate approach to, or understanding of the factor. The TEP believes there is question as to whether the offeror would be able to perform satisfactorily.3 The response to the factor is adequate. Overall, it meets the specifications and requirements, such that the TEP believes that the offeror could perform to meet the Government's minimum requirements.4 The response to the factor is good with some superior features. Information provided is generally clear, and the approach is acceptable with the possibility of more than adequate performance.5 The response to the factor is superior in most features.

(2) Ranking. The use of pre-established cut-off scores to determine the competitive range or the source to be selected is prohibited. Each member of the TEP shall independently evaluate and score each offer. The TEP shall develop a consensus opinion on the scores assigned to each offer. The averaging of individual TEP members’ scores to arrive at an overall panel score is prohibited.

(3) The goal of the technical evaluation is to understand each offeror's proposal and to assess each proposal relative to the specified evaluation factors. The TEP report(s) should address any perceived strengths, as well as any perceived weaknesses or deficiencies, and risks associated with the offerors’ performance. Scores may or may not change from the initial evaluation to the supplemental evaluation, depending on the offerors’ response to interrogatories. The supplemental TEP report must explain the rationale for no change in score, as well as any decrease or increase in score as a result of the offerors’ response to interrogatories.

(b) Technical evaluation panel report of initial offers. The TEP shall deliver their report to the Contracting Officer upon completion of the evaluation of initial offers.

(1) The TEP report shall include: (i) A detailed scoring of each offer received and a narrative summary of facts and findings of significant strengths, weaknesses, and risks associated with each offer. The narrative summary and the score must be consistent. Score sheets prepared by each individual panel member must be made available upon the Contracting Officer's request. For contracts valued at $500,000 or less, the Chairperson of the TEP may use the short form technical evaluation format (EPA Form 1900-61); and

(ii) Any interrogatories the Contracting Officer should submit to offerors to clarify their technical proposals to address any weaknesses, deficiencies, or questions associated with their technical proposals. The Contracting Officer may review the technical proposals and TEP evaluation, and submit any additional interrogatories deemed appropriate.

(2)(i) A statement that the respective technical evaluation panel members are free from actual or potential personal conflicts of interest, and are in compliance with the Office of Government Ethics ethics provisions at 5 CFR Part 2635.

(ii) Any information which might reveal that a offeror has an actual or potential organizational conflict of interest.

(3) The Contracting Officer may release the cost/price proposals to the entire TEP or solely to the TEP Chairperson, after the TEP has completed its evaluation of initial proposals. The TEP or Chairperson should evaluate cost/price proposals to determine whether the offerors’ cost/price proposals adequately reflect their technical proposals and the requirements of the solicitation, and demonstrate that the proposed price or cost provides an adequate understanding of the requirements of the solicitation. Any inconsistencies between the proposals and the solicitation requirements should be identified. Any inconsistencies between the cost and technical proposals should also be identified.

(c) Safeguarding information. The following procedures are prescribed for protecting source selection information.

(1) Offerors’ identities, offer contents, and prices shall be treated with the utmost discretion to avoid compromising the evaluation results or giving any offeror an unfair competitive advantage. Any questions regarding the receipt and distribution of offers, status of the proceedings, or other matters shall be referred to the Contracting Officer or designated contract specialist.

(2) After receipt of proposals, the contract specialist shall serially number all proposal copies received, distribute the required number of proposal copies to the TEP and BEP, and be responsible for the collection and final disposal of proposal copies. The panel chairpersons shall maintain a log of proposal distribution within the TEP and BEP. The contract specialist shall destroy all excess copies of proposals in a timely manner. The original copy of each unsuccessful proposal should be retained by the contract specialist as a reference in conducting debriefings. A minimum of two copies of the successful proposal should be retained (contract file copy/Project Officer file copy) for reference in administering the contract. Final disposition of the file shall be accomplished in accordance with FAR subpart 4.8, and the EPA “Records Management Manual.”

(d) Rejection of proposals. The Competition Advocate is authorized to make the determination in FAR 15.608(b).