36 C.F.R. § 51.16

How will the Director evaluate proposals and select the best one?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Director will apply the selection factors set forth in § 51.17 by assessing each timely proposal under each of the selection factors on the basis of a narrative explanation, discussing any subfactors when applicable. For each selection factor, the Director will assign a score that reflects the determined merits of the proposal under the applicable selection factor and in comparison to the other proposals received, if any. The maximum aggregate score available for all selection factors will be 40 points, and every selection factor used must have a maximum score of one point or higher. Each selection factor will be scored as identified in the prospectus, subject to the following criteria:

(1) The maximum score assignable for the principal selection factor described in § 51.17(a)(5) will be less than the lowest maximum score of the other principal selection factors described in § 51.17(a) with a score of one point for agreeing to the prospectus franchise fee (as defined in § 51.78) or, when the Director determines appropriate, the minimum acceptable franchise fee set forth in the prospectus.

(2) The maximum score assignable for the secondary selection factor set forth in § 51.17(b)(1) will be less than the maximum score for the principal selection factor described in § 51.17(a)(5); and,

(3) The maximum scores assignable for any additional secondary selection factors set forth in § 51.17(b) will be such that the maximum aggregate score assignable for all additional secondary selection factors will be less than the maximum score for the principal selection factor described in § 51.17(a)(5).

(b) The Director will then assign a cumulative point score to each proposal based on the assigned score for each selection factor.

(c) The responsive proposal with the highest cumulative point score will be selected by the Director as the best proposal. If two or more responsive proposals receive the same highest point score, the Director will select as the best proposal (from among the responsive proposals with the same highest point score), the responsive proposal that the Director determines on the basis of a narrative explanation will, on an overall basis, best achieve the purposes of this part. Consideration of revenue to the United States in this determination and in scoring proposals under principal selection factor five will be subordinate to the objectives of protecting, conserving, and preserving the resources of the park area and of providing necessary and appropriate visitor services to the public at reasonable rates.

[65 FR 20668, Apr. 17, 2000, as amended at 88 FR 90118, Dec. 29, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2014–2017 · leading case: Jordan Pond Co., LLC v. United States, 115 Fed. Cl. 623 (Fed. Cl. 2014).
Jordan Pond Co., LLC v. United States, 115 Fed. Cl. 623 (Fed. Cl. 2014). “17 and the standard scoring scheme for these factors set forth in 36 C.F.R. § 51.16 . 3 AR at 125-26. The selection factors and scoring scheme are set forth in this manner in the prospectus: For each selection factor, the Service will assign a score that reflects the determined…”
Nat'l Mall Tours of Washington, Inc. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 862 F.3d 35 (D.C. Cir. 2017). “§§ 101913(1), (5)(A); see 36 C.F.R. § 51.16 . For example, Principal Selection Factor 3 considers the “experience and related background” of the offeror, and Principal Selection Factor 4 considers “the financial capability” of the offeror to carry out its proposal.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.