Is it a DOD practice,in full and open olicitations ,to award to a Hubzone firm which,after the PEP is applied,dislodges a low bid large business,even though there are lower bids from small business? To illustrate low bid is large,second low is small and third is Hubzone--after PEP small business is low,Hub is second low and large is third...and award goes to the Hubzone?

By Hiro on Tuesday, June 26, 2001 - 03:39 pm:

It may only dislodge a LB.

By Anonymous on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 - 12:07 pm:

That ia my understanding but the DOD question came up in a letter by a contract counsel who indicated in his writing that that was the DoD practice;and as I knew that could not be correct I asked if in fact DoD was employing the HZ PEP in the manner stated.

By sgoldstein on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 05:06 pm:

The low price large business should be displaced by a HUBZone small business if, when the PEP is added, the HUBZone price is lower than the large business bid. This is true regardless of whether there are intervening small business bidders. The rationale is that the small businesses would not be negatively effected as they would never have obtained the award in the first place.

By sineq on Friday, July 06, 2001 - 10:16 am:

Let's see if we have this right.(as it relates to IFB's) .the term "otherwise successful offer from small business" from FAR 52.219.4 means a small business who has submitted the low bid and is otherwise successful because the price is reasonable,he is responsive and responsible etc.If this is not the case,and a small business is not low then barring any other circumstances,he can never recieve award. This is understandable....the problem,as I see it, is that neither the HZ Notice at 52.219-4 nor the Contract Award provision at 52-214-10 are usable in this instance. I think either the HZ Notice provision must be re-written to inform bidders and that additional instruction be included to indicate that if 219-4 is included in the solicitation 214-10 is not. Or modify 214-10 to inform bidders that the lowest evaluated price may not result in award.

By sgoldstein on Friday, July 06, 2001 - 04:57 pm:

Sineq,

Is there a conflict? 52.214-10 says that the award will go to the low responsible bidder after considering price and price related factors specified in the solicition. If you place the PEP clause in the solicition aren't you covered as you are only evaluating price and related factors?

By SINEQ on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 07:44 am:

The only way this makes sense is if the factor is added to every bid except the bid of a small business who is the apparent low. There are other exceptions but they are written in an understandable manner. Still the language in the clause is unclear. The concept that a bidder in fifth place can advance over three qualified small businesses must be made clear to bidders and the existing language does not do so.

By CMERCY on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 08:29 am:

This would make perfect sense if the term "otherwise successful offer" used in the FAR 52.219-04 provision were,like the SDB PEA Notice,written in the singular not the plural. The use of the plural misleads readers into thinking any small business lower in price than the HZ is unaffected by the PEP. Except for a low small business bid this is untrue.