Committee debates technical evaluation panels, subcontracting plan fixes and Ombudsman placement

Committee members pressed witnesses on the TEP process and subcontracting plan requirements. OCP explained that TEPs perform technical scoring and usually should not consider price during the initial technical evaluation; the contracting officer then compares technical recommendations against solicitation criteria and must provide a reasoned independent assessment when disagreeing with a TEP.

Both OCP and OAG supported allowing contracting officers to negotiate corrections to subcontracting plans (for example, to fix incorrect CBE numbers or small calculation errors) during the best‑and‑final‑offer stage to avoid disqualifying otherwise responsive and potentially lower‑priced offers. OCP argued keeping the Ombudsman within OCP preserves vendor relationships, outreach and quick access to procurement staff; OAG said the ombudsman should not be placed within OAG but expressed openness to clarifying how the office would operate for agencies with independent procurement authority.

Committee members noted these procedural fixes could reduce resolicitations, preserve competition, and speed awards.