What does the working table show?
Illustrative example. Replace each heading with the actual approved project scope and supplier responses.
| Field | Evidence needed | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Included equipment and interfaces | Record deviations |
| Testing | Factory and site evidence | Clarify missing tests |
| Delivery | Incoterm or delivery point | Compare same basis |
| Price | Currency and line items | Do not invent adjustments |
How should the comparison basis be controlled?
Use the issued RFQ revision as the row source. An apparent price difference is not meaningful until exclusions and delivery bases are visible.
The cited FAR provisions govern specified US federal simplified acquisitions, not ordinary private engineering tenders. They are an example of disclosing the evaluation basis and evaluating against the solicitation.
Sources: Acquisition.gov: FAR 13.106-2, Evaluation of quotations or offers
What should stay open?
Record unanswered supplier questions, divergent assumptions and missing documents in a clarification log. The engineering and commercial leads approve the final comparison.
Common questions
What else should the bid team know?
Can a missing supplier response be treated as compliant?
No. Mark it open and ask for clarification.
Does the table recommend an award?
No. It structures evidence for the buyer's decision.
Who approves technical compliance?
The responsible project engineer reviews technical compliance and performs any engineering sign-off.
Primary sources
- FAR 13.106-1, Soliciting competitionAcquisition.gov
- FAR 13.106-2, Evaluation of quotations or offersAcquisition.gov
- Request for Quotation formUS General Services Administration