c.  Requirements

Comment: Several respondents agreed that encouraging revised statements of work in appropriate circumstances would likely result in increased competition, and were in favor of these proposed revisions. One respondent stated that the reason why only one offer was received in part is likely because the requirement is too restrictive in its content, so that rewording the requirement can facilitate more offers. Several respondents stated that the proposed rule did not adequately address the process for amending the solicitation when only one offer is received due to flawed solicitation requirements, specifications, contract types, etc. One respondent stated that DoD should set forth guidelines and/or criteria for determining when and how a solicitation should be revised.

Response: It is a duty of the competition advocate to challenge requirements that are not stated in terms of functions to be performed, performance required, or essential physical characteristics and identify any condition or action that has the effect of unnecessarily restricting competition (FAR 6.502(b)(1)). FAR 11.002 provides policy on stating requirements in a way to maximize competition. A cross reference to these FAR citations has been added at DFARS 215.371-2(a).