Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page


(Revised January 31, 2018)


PGI 215.402 Pricing policy.

PGI 215.403 Obtaining certified cost or pricing data.

PGI 215.403-1 Prohibition on obtaining certified cost or pricing data (10 U.S.C. 2306a

and 41 U.S.C. chapter 35).

expected the subsequent orders to exceed $19.5 million (based on the estimated maximum

amount for the IDIQ or other supportable estimate of future orders). The organization would report this in accordance with DFARS 215.403-1(c)(3) for the period in which the IDIQ contract was awarded, and would include the total dollar amount of subsequent orders under the exception expected at the time of award.

expected to exceed $19.5 million. Reporting (in the year the modification was issued) will

include this IDIQ contract, the amount of this order, and any other expected future orders that will use the exception.

the exception with expected awards over $19.5 million, there would be no further report, e.g., when a subsequent order under that contract exceeds $19.5 million, because reporting

for that contract was already accomplished.

only way to determine price reasonableness.

PGI 215.403-3 Requiring data other than certified cost or pricing data.

Sole source to CCC, fixed price, with estimated value of $600 million.

Include provision and clause in accordance with 215.408(3)(i)(A)(2) and (ii)(A(1)(ii), respectively, because estimated value exceeds $500 million.

Sole source to CCC, cost reimbursement, with estimated value of $800,000.

Include provision and clause in accordance with 215.408(3)(i)(A)(1) and (ii)(A(1)(i), respectively, because estimated value exceeds $750,000.

Sole source to CCC ,cost-reimbursement, with estimated value of $500,000.

Do not include provision and clause, unless D&F is approved in accordance with 215.408(3)(i)(B)and (ii)(A)(2)), respectively, because estimated value does not exceed $750.000.

Sole source to CCC ,fixed price, with estimated value of $800,000

Do not include provision and clause, unless D&F is approved in accordance with 215.408(3)(i)(B)and (ii)(A)(2)), respectively, because estimated value does not exceed $500 million.

Modifications to contracts that include the clause 252.215-7004.

If 252.215-7004 is included in the contract, then data are required for modifications valued above the simplified acquisition threshold, or a higher threshold specified in the solicitation by the contracting officer, in accordance with 252.215-7004(b).

PGI 215.404 Proposal analysis.

PGI 215.404-1 Proposal analysis techniques.

and reasonable.

reasonableness and the offeror will not furnish that data, use the following sequence of

steps to resolve the issue:

and why it is needed to determine fair and reasonable prices, and should be flexible in

requesting data in existing formats with appropriate explanations from the offeror.

should elevate the issue within the contracting activity.

contracting officer, discuss the issue with appropriate levels of the offeror’s management.

activity management shall elevate the issue to the head of the contracting activity for a

decision in accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a)(4).


that data;

item from this particular source; and

develop a second source by...; bring the procurement in house to the Government by...).

the DoD Guide to Collection and Use of Past Performance Information, Version 3, dated

May 2003, the contracting officer shall provide input into the past performance system, noting the offeror’s refusal to provide the requested information.

require a cost analysis (see paragraph (b)(iv) of this section). This will occur when a price

analysis is not sufficient for determining prices to be fair and reasonable. In such cases, the contracting officer should consider the need for a Defense Contract Audit Agency audit of the cost data.

services. While the order of preference at FAR 15.402 must be followed, if the contracting

officer cannot determine price reasonableness without obtaining data other than cost or pricing data from the offeror, at a minimum, the contracting officer must obtain appropriate data on the prices at which the same or similar items have been sold previously (often previous sales data was the basis of the commercial item determination and must be requested during price analysis of the data provided by the offeror). If previous sales data is not sufficient to determine price reasonableness, the contracting officer must obtain “data other than certified cost or pricing data” and, if necessary, perform a cost analysis.

scope, should not rely solely on earned value management budgets or estimates for

estimating the costs of all work deleted, or the cost of deleted work already performed (reference FAR subpart 15.4, Table 15-2—Instructions for Submitting Cost/Price Proposals When Certified Cost or Pricing Data are Required, columns (2) and (3) of section III.B., Change Orders, Modifications, and Claims).

previous prices paid by the Government were based on a thorough price and/or cost

analysis. For example, it would not be sufficient to use price(s) from a database paid by another contracting officer without understanding the type of analysis that was performed to determine the price(s), and without verifying that the quantities were similar for pricing purposes. This does not necessarily need to be another analysis, but there should be coordination with the other office that acknowledges an analysis was performed previously.

Commercial Items, Part B: Pricing Commercial Items, for information about how to obtain advisory assistance from the DoD cadre of experts in the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Commercial Item Group (CIG) via email at or at

PGI 215.404-2 Data to support proposal analysis.


contractor's proposal requires further review of subcontractors' cost estimates at the subcontractors' plants (after due consideration of reviews performed by the prime contractor), the contracting officer should inform the administrative contracting officer (ACO) having cognizance of the prime contractor before the review is initiated.

PGI 215.404-3 Subcontract pricing considerations.

PGI 215.404-70 DD Form 1547, Record of Weighted Guidelines Method Application.

objective; and

part of the contract price.

PGI 215.404-71 Weighted guidelines method.

PGI 215.404-71-4 Facilities capital employed.

percentages of land, building, and equipment for the business unit performing the contract. Choose the most practical method for obtaining this data, for example—

PGI 215.406-1 Prenegotiation objectives.

(iii) Notwithstanding the above, the Director, DCAA, may always raise audit issues to the Director, DPAP.

(d) See Frequently asked ‘Questions and Answers” at relating to the limitations placed on the Department of Defense for aggregate annual amounts available for contracted services in accordance with section 808 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2012, P.L. 112-81 and DFARS Class Deviation 2012-O0012, Limitation on Amounts Available for Contracted Services, dated July 31, 2012.

PGI 215.406-3 Documenting the negotiation.


Application (see DFARS 215.404-70), if used, with supporting rationale;

postnegotiation noncompetitive business clearance documents (e.g., price negotiation

memoranda) are uploaded into the Contract Business Analysis Repository (CBAR) at for the purpose of sharing negotiation

experience with other contracting officers preparing to negotiate. This includes both

noncompetitive actions using the procedures at FAR part 12, Acquisition of

Commercial Items, as well as noncompetitive actions using the procedures at FAR part 15,

Contracting by Negotiation, that are valued in excess of $25 million and awarded on or after

June 24, 2013 (and for all definitized or awarded actions over $100 million, which occurred

on or after October 1, 2012).

PGI 215.407-2 Make-or-buy programs.

PGI 215.407-4 Should-cost review.

PGI 215.407-5 Estimating systems.

PGI 215.407-5-70 Disclosure, maintenance, and review requirements.

PGI 215.470 Estimated data prices.

Previous PageTop Of PageTable Of ContentsNext Page