all negotiated competitive prime procurements expected to exceed $5 million, excepting procurements for architect-engineer services, and procurements specifically waived by the head of the agency. Detailed procedures regarding the designation and operation of the SEBS are set forth in the SEB handbook. RFPs prepared by formal SEBs are reviewed by a solicitation review panel conducted by Headquarters. (c) Negotiated competitive procurements below $5 million are not subject to the SEB Handbook (Procurement Handbook #1), except for those situations as determined by the head of the agency or designee. For those under $5 million, less formal procedures are used. For those procurements under $5 million but more than $1 million, source evaluation panels may be established. These panels may follow the policies and procedures set forth in the SEB Handbook as a guide. For procurements under $1 million less formal source evaluation and selection procedures will be used. (d) The contracting officer may form teams to evaluate the technical, business and management, and cost aspects of proposals. When teams are used, each will function independent of the other and report its findings to the contracting officer. The contracting officer will discuss those findings with the teams (or representatives thereof) separately or together, as may be more helpful. The contracting officer will negotiate and execute the contractual instrument, using, in many cases, some of the same specialists who participated in earlier evaluations and discussions. ERDA-PR Part 9-51 sets forth administrative requirements for the review and approval of certain contract actions. (e) In selections other than where price is the determining factor, the evaluation procedures set forth in (1), (2) and (3) below should be considered. (1) Technical evaluation. Generally, the contracting officer must rely on scientific and engineering personnel for assistance in reviewing proposals from a technical point of view. It is imperative, therefore, that technical evaluations and findings be fully documented and reviewed by responsible personnel. The report should reflect the scoring and ranking of the proposals and shall identify each proposal as acceptable or unacceptable. The report shall also include a narrative evaluation specifying the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal, and any reservations or qualifications that might bear upon the selection of sources for negotiation and award. Concrete technical reasons supporting a determination of unacceptability with regard to any proposal shall be included. After evaluation and preparation of written and signed evaluation findings by the technical evaluators, such evaluations and proposals shall be returned to the contracting officer or authorized representative, and maintained as a permanent record in the contract file. in manner Management capabilities of a timely (2) Business and Management evaluation. the offeror to perform the required work must be appraised. In making this appraisal, the following factors, as appropriate, must be considered: the company's management organization; past performance; reputation for reliability; availability of required facilities; cost controls; ability to control, maintain and account for any property provided by the Government; and the offeror's willingness to devote its resources to the proposed work with appropriate diligence; and financial capacity, certifications, representations, special clause requirements and any other pertinent administrative and business information that may have been requested in the RFP. (3) Price/cost considerations. Each proposal requires some form of price or cost analysis. The evaluation should consider items such as, categories and amounts of labor, indirect costs, materials, travel, computer time, as well as information with regard to a contractor's past cost performance, including contracts or subcontracts for like services or supplies. The contracting officer must exercise judgment in determining the extent of analysis in each case. Price/ cost analysis should be performed by personnel trained in this discipline. (f) Personnel from ERDA, other Government agencies and prime management or operating contractors may be used in the selection process as advisors when their services are necessary and available. Disclosure of proposals outside of the Government is discussed in $9-3.150-4. In all instances such personnel will be required to comply with ERDA conflict of interest regulations and nondisclosure of information requirements. (a) While negotiated procurement shall be on a competitive basis to the maximum practical extent (FPR 1-3.101(d)) and reasonable competition shall be obtained in making small purchases in excess of $500 (FPR 1-3.603-(1)), there are circumstances where one source (or groups of sources) has exclusive capability to perform the work within the time required and at reasonable prices, e.g., by reason of experience, specialized facilities, or technical competence. In such a circumstance, the initiating program office may conclude that only one source (or groups of sources) is qualified to perform the work and, therefore, recommend that a contract be negotiated only with that source or group (in the case of a "group sole source" situation, a justification is required for limiting competition to that group and for the allocation of work among members of the group). The recommendation shall be in writing and will be contained in a separate document entitled, "Justification for Noncompetitive Procurement" and shall examine the reasons for the procurement being noncompetitive in accordance with paragraph (c) below. For a noncompetitive procurement, an approved justification shall be attached to the procurement request when the request is sent to a contracting officer for action. A justification for noncompetitive procurement is also required where "new" procurements (i.e., outside the contractual scope of work) are initiated through modifications to existing contracts. If a noncompetitive procurement has been justified and approved, in accordance with this section, as a part of an annual procurement plan and such plan has been reviewed and approved, it will not be necessary to resubmit the justification for approval at the time each individual procurement action is processed. Such justifications shall be made a part of the permanent contract file (see ERDA-PR 9-1.313). (b) The provisions of this regulation do not apply to: (2) acquisitions from or through other Government agencies; (3) procurements of utility services where the services are available from only one source. (4) subscriptions to periodicals; (5) procurements resulting from program opportunity notices, ERDA-PR 9-4.57, or program research and development announcements, ERDA-PR 9-4.58 (which are forms of competitive solicitations and subject to requirements stated in the respective regulations); 9-4.51; (6) (7) ERDA-PR 9-4.9; procurements subject to the procedures set forth in ERDA-PR procurements subject to the procedures set forth in (8) contracts for management and operation of the major laboratories and production facilities; (9) onsite service contracts of a continuing nature; or (10) contracts which are subject to separate justification for recompetition or extension. (c) Justification for noncompetitive procurement. (1) The document entitled "Justification for Noncompetitive Procurement" shall examine the reasons for the procurement being noncompetitive and shall contain, in the first sentence of the document, an appropriate recommendation (e.g., "I recommend that negotiations be conducted only with (name of entity) for the supplies and services described herein.") (2) Each justification shall set forth enough facts and circumstances to clearly and convincingly establish that competition would not have been feasible or practicable. The following format includes considerations to be made in preparing the justification. (i) Description of supplies or services to be procured: A. A brief, general, nontechnical description and statement of the general application and particular significance or specialized character of the procurement. B. A description of all associated supplies or services, e.g., technical data, reports, engineering services, and So forth to be procured. (ii) Procurement history, estimated future requirements, and long range procurement objectives: A. Brief statement of the technical and contractual evolution of the supplies or services being procured from initiation to present status. B. Brief statement as to whether the work is a continuation of previous effort performed by the proposed contractor. C. Reference should be made to any advance planning information previously prepared or furnished, together with information with respect to any changes proposed in the present justification which represents a departure or modification of prior procurement plans, including a statement of the effect of the changes, if any, on scheduled milestones. D. Brief statement as to what actions have been taken to develop competition and eliminate a noncompetitive situation in future procurements of the proposed supplies or services. (iii) Estimated cost: A. The estimated cost of the procurement and a brief description of assumptions made and data used by the initiating program office to develop the estimate. B. The estimated cost listed by fiscal years. C. Whether the proposed contractor or the Government have a substantial investment of some kind that would have to be duplicated at Government expense by another source. requirement. (iv) Schedule requirements: A. The basis for establishing schedule requirements. B. An explanation of the urgency, if any, of the the proposed contractor can meet them. C. Describe what significant cost savings or other benefits could result if schedules could be relaxed and whether competition could thus be obtained. (v) Exclusive capability. A. Does the proposed contractor have personnel considered unquestionably predominant experts in the particular field? B. What prior experience of a highly specialized nature does the source exclusively have that is vital to the proposed effort? C. What facilities and test equipment does the source exclusively have that are complex or specialized and vital to the effort? D. Is competition precluded because of the existence of patent rights, copyrights, secret processes, trade secrets, technical data, or other proprietary data? What other capability and capacity does the proposed contractor have that is necessary for the specific effort and makes it clearly the only source that can perform the work on the required time schedule without incurring clearly unreasonable costs? (vi) Other. A. If lack of drawings or specifications are a constraining factor, why is the proposed contractor clearly best able to perform under these circumstances? Why are the drawings and specifications lacking? What is the lead time required to get drawings and specifications suitable for competitions? B. Are parts or components being procured as replacement parts in support of equipment specially designed by a manufacturer, where data available is not adequate to assure that the parts |