Comment on FR Doc # 2012-21973

Removing the current language in FAR 42.1503(b), and implementing this proposed change, would not only worsen economies and efficiencies, but would have the ancillary effect of worsening government and industry relations at a time when they desperately need to be improved if the government wants to realize better outcomes. The FAR language currently requires agencies to provide for review of agency evaluations at a level above the contracting officer to consider disagreements between the parties regarding a past performance evaluation. This is not only a good measure, but also a common sense approach to resolving differences quickly and efficiently. Many times negative past performance evaluations do not gave sufficient documentation or supporting evidence to justify the evaluation. Further, there have been enough instances of negative past performance evaluations resulting from personality conflicts or other resultant negative perceptions and circumstances outside of actual performance. The process is akin to an “appeal” to the contracting official’s management, allowing the opportunity for objective evaluation and fairness should the negative rating not be justified and legitimate. These action allow for resolving discrepancies faster, since the environment between the contracting official and the contractor are presumed strained at thus junction. Removing this language would be counterproductive, and would not allow needed accountability at the contracting official level to ensure proper evaluations are being conducted.