Beginner Track • Topic 33

Price Negotiation Memorandums

A PNM is not a formality. It is the record of how you determined the Government paid a fair price. You are not trying to win a negotiation - you are trying to document that both parties arrived at a price that is fair and reasonable. That distinction changes everything about how you approach the table.

Training

Price Negotiation Memorandums (PNMs)

How to document the principal elements of a negotiated agreement, set pre-negotiation objectives, and determine that a price is fair and reasonable. Governed by FAR 15.406.

1 What Is a PNM and When Is It Required?

A Price Negotiation Memorandum is the contracting officer's written record of how the negotiated price was reached and why it is fair and reasonable. FAR 15.406-3 requires the PNM for all negotiated contracts and modifications to document the principal elements of the agreement - what each party proposed, what techniques were used, what concessions were made, and what the CO ultimately determined about the price.

PNMs are required for negotiated procurements - primarily Part 15 acquisitions and price-only modifications to existing contracts. Sealed bidding under FAR Part 14 does not require a PNM because there is no negotiation. For simplified acquisitions under the simplified acquisition threshold, documentation requirements are less prescriptive, but the CO still needs to document the basis for the fair and reasonable price determination in the contract file.

The threshold that changes everything - TINA. The Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA), codified at 10 U.S.C. 3702 and FAR 15.403-4, requires contractors to submit certified cost or pricing data for contracts and modifications expected to exceed $2 million, unless an exception applies. When TINA applies, the PNM must document how the Government used that cost data to arrive at the negotiated price. When TINA does not apply (competition, commercial items, below threshold), the PNM must document the exception and the alternative basis for the fair and reasonable determination.

Key TINA exceptions to know: Adequate price competition is the most common exception - when you receive two or more responsive offers and award to the lowest-priced or best-value offeror after competition, you typically do not need certified cost or pricing data. Catalog prices and established commercial prices are another exception. Below the $2M threshold, you use data other than certified cost or pricing data - things like market research, prior prices, catalog comparisons, or an IGE.

The PNM is your paper trail. Auditors, inspectors general, and oversight reviews will read your PNM years after the fact. If you cannot explain in the PNM why the price was fair and reasonable - using specific numbers, specific analysis, and specific conclusions - you have a documentation problem even if the underlying price was fine. Write the PNM as if you will not be there to explain it.

2 Pre-Negotiation Objectives

FAR 15.406-1 requires the contracting officer to establish pre-negotiation objectives before any negotiation begins. These are not just a number - they are a documented position that tells you where you want to land and why. The pre-negotiation objective memo (sometimes called the pre-neg or PNO) establishes the Government's position on price, profit or fee, and any other significant terms before the CO sits down with the contractor.

Why does this matter? Because without a pre-negotiation objective, you have no anchor. You walk into the room not knowing your walk-away point, not knowing what concessions you can make, and not knowing whether the deal you leave with is actually good. The contractor who comes in with a detailed technical proposal and a confident price has done their homework. If you have not done yours, you are negotiating blind.

Your pre-neg objective should include: The Government's price objective (supported by your analysis), your assessment of the contractor's proposal (which elements are well-supported, which are not), your profit or fee objective, and the range within which you expect to settle. It does not need to be a formal document - but it needs to exist before you negotiate, and it needs to be referenced in the PNM.

The pre-neg objective is also where you document what analysis you did. Did you use the IGE? Comparison to prior purchases? Market research? Field pricing assistance from DCAA or DCMA? A technical evaluation of labor hours? All of that feeds into the pre-neg and ultimately into the PNM. If you skip the pre-neg, you also lose the analytical foundation for the PNM.

Pre-Neg in Practice

A contractor submits a proposal for $1.8M on a services contract. The IGE is $1.4M. Before negotiations, the CO documents a pre-negotiation objective of $1.45M, identifies the specific areas where the contractor's proposal appears excessive (labor hours in Phase 2, material costs without adequate support), and notes the profit objective is 10%. When the contractor opens at $1.8M and the CO pushes back, the CO is not guessing - they have specific, documented reasons why Phase 2 hours are too high. That is a negotiation. Without the pre-neg, it is just a conversation about whose number sounds better.


3 The Goal Is Not to Win

This is the single most important mindset shift for a new contracting officer entering price negotiations. You are not trying to win. You are not trying to get the lowest possible price. You are not trying to grind the contractor into the ground. You are trying to arrive at a price that is fair and reasonable to both the Government and the contractor.

What does fair and reasonable mean in practice? It means the price is realistic for the work to be done - not so high that the Government overpays, but not so low that the contractor cannot perform and may cut corners or submit a claim later. A contractor who accepts an impossibly low price to win the contract is a problem waiting to happen. The Government's interest is served by contractors who can actually deliver at the agreed price with quality and on schedule.

FAR 15.405 says it plainly: "The Government's objective is to negotiate a contract type and price (or fee) that will result in reasonable contractor risk and provide the contractor with the greatest incentive for efficient and economical performance." That is not "get the lowest price." That is "get a price where the contractor has appropriate risk and an incentive to perform well."

Practically, this means you approach negotiations with respect, not adversarial energy. You explain your analysis when you push back on a number. You listen when the contractor explains their rationale. You make concessions when the contractor's position is supported. You hold firm when it is not. And when you are done, the contractor should understand why the agreed price is fair even if it is lower than what they proposed.

The contractor is also a party with legitimate interests. If you squeeze a contractor's profit to zero on a five-year services contract, you should not be surprised when they under-staff it, request equitable adjustments, or walk away at the first option period. Sustainable contracts come from fair prices - not from COs who treated negotiations as combat.

Traps to avoid. Do not anchor your position by disclosing the IGE before negotiations. Do not make concessions just to end the negotiation quickly. Do not accept a price just because the contractor insists it is their "best and final" if your analysis says otherwise. And do not negotiate against yourself - let the contractor respond to your position before you move off it.

4 What the PNM Must Document

FAR 15.406-3(a) lays out the required elements of the PNM. Every element has a purpose - together they tell the story of how the Government arrived at the negotiated price and why it is defensible.

  • Purpose of the negotiation. What were you negotiating? Initial award, price-only modification, definitization of an undefinitized contract action, option exercise? One sentence is usually sufficient.
  • Description of the acquisition. What are you buying - supplies, services, construction? What is the contract number or RFP number? What contract type?
  • Names and positions of negotiators. Who was at the table for the Government and for the contractor? The CO is the lead Government negotiator. The contractor typically sends their contracts manager or program manager.
  • Contractor systems status. To the extent relevant, document whether DCAA or DCMA has reviewed the contractor's accounting, estimating, or purchasing systems and any significant findings that affected the negotiation.
  • Certified cost or pricing data / exception. Was TINA triggered? If so, document how the data was used. If not, document which exception applies and what alternative data you used to determine price reasonableness.
  • Summary of the contractor's proposal and the Government's pre-negotiation objective. Both numbers, side by side. And the analysis behind the Government's position.
  • Significant facts and considerations. What drove the Government's objective? What drove the negotiated price? If there is a significant difference between the pre-neg objective and the final price, explain it. Did the contractor provide new information? Did the scope change? Did the technical evaluation reveal something unexpected?
  • Profit or fee objective and negotiated profit/fee. What profit or fee percentage did the Government target and what was agreed? For FFP contracts, this is typically embedded in the price - but document the weighted guidelines analysis or the structured approach you used.
  • Determination that the negotiated price is fair and reasonable. This is the conclusion. State it explicitly. "Based on [analysis method], the negotiated price of $X is determined to be fair and reasonable." This is not optional language - it is required.
The most common PNM deficiency: Missing or vague fair and reasonable determinations. "The price appears reasonable" is not sufficient. "Based on adequate price competition from three responsive offerors, the negotiated price of $X is determined to be fair and reasonable" is sufficient. Be specific about what made it fair and reasonable and reference the method.

PNM Generator

Answer the questions below and the tool will generate draft language for each required PNM section. Copy individual sections or use the full output as a starting framework.

🔒 Do not enter contractor names or other source-selection sensitive information. The output uses [Contractor Name] as a placeholder - fill that in on your own copy after downloading.
1 — Contract Basics
Type of action
New Award
Initial contract or order award
Modification
Price modification to existing contract
Task / Delivery Order
Order placed under an IDIQ vehicle
Definitization
Definitizing an undefinitized contract action
Competition status
Full & Open
Competed - adequate price competition
Limited Competition
Set-aside, restricted, or limited pool
Sole Source
Non-competitive, J&A or exception applied
Estimated contract value
Under $10K
Micro-purchase threshold
$10K - $250K
Above micro, below SAT
$250K - $2M
Above SAT, below TINA threshold
Over $2M
TINA threshold - cost or pricing data may be required
2 — The Numbers
Your price objective before negotiations began
The offeror's opening price
The agreed price at conclusion of negotiations
Proposal vs. Objective
-
Reduction from Proposal
-
Final vs. Objective
-
% Change from Proposal
-
3 — Basis for Price Objective
How did you establish the Government's price objective?
Price Competition
Two or more responsive offers received - adequate price competition under FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)
Prior Purchase History
Previous Government price for same or substantially similar items / services
Market Research / Catalog
Catalog prices, published market data, or commercial price comparisons
Independent Government Estimate
IGE developed by the requiring activity or CO based on technical analysis
Cost Analysis
Analysis of cost elements in contractor's proposal - labor, materials, ODCs, profit
Field Pricing Assistance
DCAA audit or DCMA technical evaluation of contractor's proposal
4 — Negotiation Techniques Used
Select all that apply
Challenged Unsupported Rates
Identified specific cost elements lacking adequate support or appearing excessive
Presented Competitive Data
Used market data, competitive quotes, or published rates to challenge pricing
Referenced Prior Prices
Compared to previously negotiated prices for same or similar work
Evaluated Labor Hours / Mix
Technical evaluation of proposed hours or labor category mix against PWS/SOW
Applied Wage / Escalation Adjustments
Applied SCA wage determinations, CPI indices, or EPA clause adjustments
Negotiated Profit / Fee
Structured profit analysis per FAR 15.404-4 or weighted guidelines
No Significant Differences
Proposal was well-supported and closely aligned with Government objective
5 — Result
How were negotiations concluded?
Negotiations Conducted
Verbal or written exchanges led to an agreed price
BAFO / LPTA
Best and Final Offer requested; award to lowest-priced technically acceptable
Accepted as Proposed
Proposal was fair and reasonable without negotiation
%

Generated PNM Draft

Review and edit each section before incorporating into your official memorandum.

🔒 Placeholder text in red must be filled in before use. Do not include source-selection sensitive information.
Section I — Purpose and Description
FAR 15.406-3(a)(1)-(2)
Section II — Pre-Negotiation Objectives
FAR 15.406-3(a)(6)-(7)
Section III — Summary of Negotiations
FAR 15.406-3(a)(7)
Section IV — Certified Cost or Pricing Data / Exception
FAR 15.406-3(a)(5), FAR 15.403-4
Section V — Fair and Reasonable Determination
FAR 15.406-3(a)(10)

Weighted Guidelines - DD Form 1547

When you negotiate a contract and need to determine a fair profit, you can't just pick a number out of thin air. The Government uses a structured method called Weighted Guidelines (DFARS 215.404-71) to calculate what profit a contractor actually deserves based on five factors. Each factor gets a percentage rate, you multiply it against relevant costs, and add them all up. The result is your negotiation objective for profit.

This method is required whenever you have cost or pricing data (TINA applies) - so typically sole source awards or modifications above $2 million. You document everything on DD Form 1547, which becomes part of your price negotiation record.

📚 Reference: DFARS 215.404-4 requires use of the structured approach. DFARS 215.404-71 has the full weighted guidelines method. The ranges below come straight from the DFARS tables.
1 Performance Risk Normal: 3 - 7%
Plain English: How hard is this contract to pull off? Does the contractor need to do something technically difficult, with a lot of risk of cost overruns or technical failure? If yes, they deserve more profit as a reward for taking on that risk.
Low risk example: Contractor has done this exact work dozens of times, mature technology, nothing new. Rate: around 3-4%.
High risk example: New technology, first time doing this, high chance of technical problems. Rate: 6-7%.
Normal range: 3% - 7%  |  With tech incentive: 7% - 11%
2 Contract Type Risk Varies by type
Plain English: What type of contract are you writing? The riskier the contract type is for the contractor, the more profit they deserve. On a Firm Fixed Price contract, if costs go over, the contractor eats it. That's risky - so they get more profit. On Cost Plus, the Government pays all the costs anyway, so the contractor has no cost risk - less profit.
FFP (no progress payments): 4-6% - highest contractor risk
FFP (with progress payments): 2-4% - Government is financing them
FPIF: 2-4% - some sharing built in
CPIF: 0-2% - mostly Government risk
CPFF / T&M / LH: 0-1% - minimal contractor cost risk
3 Working Capital Max: 4% of costs
Plain English: The contractor has to spend money before they get paid. They may need to buy materials, pay employees, etc. and wait months for the Government to reimburse them. That costs them money (interest, essentially). This factor compensates them for that financing cost. The longer the contract and the more costs they carry, the more they deserve here.
Formula: (Costs financed) x (Contract length factor) x (Treasury interest rate)
Important: This factor is capped at 4% of total contract costs. Only applies to contracts with progress payments or cost reimbursement where contractor carries costs.
4 Facilities Capital Equipment: 10-25%
Plain English: Did the contractor invest their own money in equipment, buildings, or land to do this contract? If a company spent millions buying CNC machines or test equipment to support Government work, they deserve a return on that investment - just like any investor expects a return. This rewards contractors who invest in capability.
Equipment (machines, tools, etc.): Normal 17.5%, range 10-25%
Buildings: 0% (buildings don't count under DFARS)
Land: 0% (land doesn't count either)
This is multiplied against the contractor's net book value of facilities, allocated to this contract.
5 Cost Efficiency 0 to +4%
Plain English: This is a bonus factor - purely at the CO's discretion. If the contractor has an outstanding track record of controlling costs, finishing under budget, implementing efficiencies, and otherwise being a good steward of Government money, you can reward that with extra profit. Think of it as a "we appreciate you not wasting our money" bonus.
Range: 0% to +4% of total objective costs.
You can only go up with this factor - not negative. Use it if the contractor genuinely deserves recognition for cost efficiency. Document your rationale.

DD Form 1547 Calculator

Total Costs
$
Factor 1 - Performance Risk
5%
Normal range 3-7%. Use 7-11% only if contract has a technology incentive provision (DFARS 215.404-71-2).
Factor 2 - Contract Type Risk
5%
Factor 3 - Working Capital
Leave costs financed at 0 if this is FFP with no progress payments (contractor bills on delivery).
$
5.5%
Current Treasury rate is set by the Department of Treasury each January and July. Check the DFARS PGI for the current rate.
Factor 4 - Facilities Capital
$
17.5%
Factor 5 - Cost Efficiency (Bonus)
0%
Discretionary bonus for contractors with documented track record of cost efficiency. Must be justified in writing.
Profit Calculation Results
1. Performance Risk 5.0% x Costs $0
2. Contract Type Risk 5.0% x Costs $0
3. Working Capital - Formula $0
4. Facilities Capital 17.5% x Net Book Value $0
5. Cost Efficiency 0.0% x Costs $0
Total Profit Objective 0.0% of Costs $0

FAR 15.406: Documentation

The primary reference for PNM requirements. FAR 15.406-1 covers pre-negotiation objectives; FAR 15.406-3 covers the PNM itself and its required elements.

Open FAR 15.4

FAR 15.405: Price Reasonableness

The standard for what makes a price fair and reasonable, and the contracting officer's responsibility to determine it before award.

Open FAR 15.405

FAR 15.404-1: Price Analysis Techniques

The toolbox for determining price reasonableness - competition, prior prices, market research, parametric estimates, cost analysis, and more.

Open FAR 15.404-1

FAR 15.404-4: Profit

Structured approach to establishing the Government's profit or fee objective. Includes weighted guidelines for cost-type and fixed-price contracts.

Open FAR 15.404-4

FAR 15.403-4: TINA (Cost or Pricing Data)

When certified cost or pricing data is required, the $2M threshold, and the consequences of defective pricing.

Open FAR 15.403-4

FAR 15.403-1: Exceptions to Cost or Pricing Data

Adequate price competition, commercial items, catalog prices, and other exceptions that waive the certified cost or pricing data requirement.

Open FAR 15.403-1

DFARS 215.406-3: PNMs for DoD

DoD-specific PNM requirements including additional documentation for profit analysis, DCAA involvement, and modifications over $15M.

Open DFARS 215.406-3

DFARS 215.404-1: Price Analysis for DoD

DoD supplements to FAR price analysis, including requirements to use SPRS, consider prior prices paid, and document the basis for profit.

Open DFARS 215.404-1