afa92_44

AFAC 92-44

IMMEDIATE ACTION

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AFAC 92-44
Headquarters US Air Force
Washington DC 20330 January 15, 1995

AIR FORCE ACQUISITION CIRCULAR

This Air Force Acquisition Circular (AFAC) is issued pursuant to the authority of FAR 1.301 and amends the 1992 Edition of the AFFARS. Reproduction is authorized.

POLICY CHANGES/INFORMATION

Item Title Pages

Section A, AFFARS Changes

A1 USD(A&T) Review of Requests for Proposal 2
and Contracts

A2 Elimination of Class I Ozone Depleting 2
Substances (ODS)

A3 Use of the SF1447 2

A4 Unsolicited Proposals 2

A5 Task Order Contracting 2

A6 Total Set-Asides for Small Disadvantaged 2
Business Concerns

A7 Application of Labor Laws 2

A8 Approval of Substitution of Surety Bonds 2

A9 Indemnification Against Unusually Hazardous 2
Risks

A10 Use of the indefinite delivery, indefinite 3
quantity (IDIQ) contract type for the
acquisition of architect-engineering (A-E)
services

A11 Voluntary refund procedures applicable to 3
spare parts

A12 Notification and reporting of substantial 3
impact on employment

A13 Nonstandard clause and Class Deviation - 3
JAN Class S Parts

A14 Source Selection Information Briefing 3
Certificate

A15 Source Selection Procedures for Other than 3
Major Acquisitions

A16 Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering 3
Requirements Program (SABER)

A17 Editorial Changes 3

No. of Printed Pages: 210
OPR: SAF/AQCF
Distribution: F (Same as FAR)
2 January 15, 1995 AFAC 92-44

ITEM DESCRIPTIONS

ITEM A1 -- USD(A&T) Review of Requests for Proposal and Contracts

AFFARS 5301.9006-9(a) is revised to reflect the decision of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition & Technology) to limit USD(A&T) review of requests for proposals and contracts to those under ACAT ID programs.

ITEM A2 -- Elimination of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS)

AFFARS Subpart 5310.90 and a clause at 5352.210-9000 are added to provide Air Force policies and procedures for elimination of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances from Air Force procurements. This item finalizes interim guidance issued under AFAC 92-29, Item E1 and SAF/AQC Memorandum 14 Oct 94, "Final Air Force Contracting Policy for Elimination of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS)."

ITEM A3 -- Use of the SF1447

AFFARS 5315.406-2(a) is revised to permit use of the Standard Form 1447, in addition to the SF 33, when soliciting firm offers for new contracts.

ITEM A4 -- Unsolicited Proposals

AFFARS 5315.506 coverage is replaced by a new section, "Air Force procedures," in accordance with FAR 15.506(a). The new section establishes HQ AFMC/PKT as focal point for unsolicited proposals received in the Headquarters USAF and the Air Force Secretariat.

ITEM A5 -- Task Order Contracting

AFFARS Subpart 5316.90 is added to prescribe Air Force policies and procedures for the use of task order contracts to acquire nonpersonal services.

ITEM A6 -- Total Set-Asides for Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns

AFFARS Section 5319.502-2-70 is added to prescribe procedures for submitting requests for determinations that a particular industry is bearing a disproportionate share of small disadvantaged business (SDB) set-asides.

ITEM A7 -- Application of Labor Laws

AFFARS Part 5322 is revised to prescribe procedures for the contracting officer to implement industrial labor relations policy issued by the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting) pursuant to AFI 64-106, Air Force Inudstrial Labor Relations Activitiees. AFI 64-106 replaced AFR 79-1.

ITEM A8 -- Approval of Substitution of Surety Bonds

AFFARS 5328.106-2 is deleted. The AFFARS requirement for approval of new surety bonds by AFMCLC/JAN was inconsistent with FAR 28.106-2, which calls for approval by the HCA.

ITEM A9 -- Indemnification Against Unusually Hazardous Risks

AFFARS 5335.070-1-90 is revised to delegate approval authority for indemnification for

AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 3

unusually hazardous risks on research and development contracts directly to the AFMC Senior Center Contracting Official (SCCO). Previously the AFFARS delegated the authority to HQ AFMC/PK with authority to redelegate. This was inconsistent with 10 U.S.C. 2354, which does not allow redelegation of this authority. The redelegation had been in the AFMC FAR Supplement.

ITEM A10 -- Use of the indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract type for the acquisition of architect-engineering (A&E) services.

AFFARS 5336.691(a) and (d) are revised to increase the delivery order limitations from $99,000 to $299,000 and the fee limitations in paragraph (b) for an IDIQ contract from to $400,000 to $750,000.

ITEM A11 -- Voluntary refund procedures applicable to spare parts

AFFARS 5342.7101-91 is revised to delete paragraph (f), which required AFMC/PK to maintain records on all voluntary refund cases.

ITEM A12 -- Notification and reporting of substantial impact on employment

AFFARS 5349.7002 is added to inform contracting officers that contractor notifications under the clause at DFARS 252.249-7001 shall be forwarded through SAF/AQCP. SAF/AQCP will accomplish the appropriate notifications.

ITEM A13 -- Nonstandard clause and class deviation - JAN CLass S Parts.

AFFARS 5351.101 & AFFARS 5352.251-9000 are added to incorporate a permanent class deviation approved by the Director of Defense Procurement to permit contractors under fixed-price contracts for space systems to acquire JAN Class S parts from the Defense Electronics Supply Center (DESC). The deviation was requested by the Space and Missile Center, AFMC.

ITEM A14 -- Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate

AFFARS Appendix AA, Attachment 11, Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate, is revised to delete the requirement for source selection participants to certify to having read and understood DoDD 5500.7.

ITEM A15 -- Source Selection Procedures for Other Than Major Acqusitions

AFFARS 5315.605-90 is added to provide Air Force procedures for Lowest Cost (Price)-Technically Acceptable source selections; 5315.612 is revised to identify Appendix BB; and a new Appendix BB is issued to replace the previous Appendix BB in its entirety. The new issuance establishes Air Force policy, assigns responsibilities, and prescribes implementing procedures for soliciting and evaluating proposals for other than major acquisitions.

ITEM A16 -- Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements Program (SABER)

AFFARS 5336.293 is added to identify the new Appendix DD and Appendix DD is issued to provide Air Force policies, procedures and guidelines for implementing the SABER program.

ITEM A17 -- Editorial Changes
4 January 15, 1995 AFAC 92-44

a. 5301.601-92(a) and (b); 5306.304(a)(4)(90) & (91); Table 5306--I; 5307.104-90(b)(1); Table 5307--I; and Appendix AA-105(c), AA-114, AA-203(b) & (b)(1); AA-205(a)(1); and AA-317(a) are updated to refer to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Acquisition and Management (PDASAF(A&M)).

b. 5301.601-91(b)(1); 5306.304(a)(2)(i); and 5319.201(d)(v) are updated to refer to 11th Support Wing.

c. 5301.601-91(c) and 5306.601-92(g)(4) are revised to delete reference to air attaches and chiefs of Air Force foreign missions as designees to the HCA.

d. 5301.601-91(a)(4); 5301.601-92(b)(1); 5301.9006-5(d); and 5301.9006-6(a) are revised to correct typographical errors.

e. AFFARS page 1-16.1 is included. This page was inadvertently omitted from AFAC 92-36.

f. 5306.304 is updated to identify the current procuring activities and to remove an obsolete reference in 5306.304-(a)(4)(91).

g. Table 5307-I is revised to clarify references to follow-on production contracts and other acquisitions that are not first time competitive.

h. 5332.610(a); 5332.613; 5332.670; and 5349.402-3(c)(2)(iii) & 4(ii) are revised to correct outdated references to Air Force Accounting and Finance Center (AFAFC) and Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) regarding the collection of debts from contractors.

INSTRUCTIONS

I. FILING INSTRUCTIONS: File AFAC 92-44 Transmittal Page and Index Pages 1 thru 5 with the AFAC.

II. POSTING INSTRUCTIONS:

Remove the Following Pages Insert the Following Pages
AFFARS A-Pages A-1 & A-2................AFFARS A-Pages A-1 & A-2
1-3 thru 1-6............................1-3 thru 1-6
1-7 & 1-8...............................1-7 & 1-8
------..................................1-16.1
1-17 & 1-18.............................1-17 & 1-18
6-1 thru 6-5............................6-1 thru 6-5
7-1 & 7-2...............................7-1 & 7-2
7-5.....................................7-5
AFAC 92-29, E-3.........................10-i & 10-1 thru 10-3
15-i & 15-ii............................15-i & 15-ii
15-1, 15-2 & 15-2.1.....................15-1, 15-2 & 15-2.1
16-i....................................16-i
16-3 & 16-4.............................16-3 thru 16-5
19-i....................................19-i
19-1 & 19-2.............................19-1 & 19-2
22-i....................................22-i
22-1....................................22-1 & 22-2
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5

Remove the Following Pages (continued) Insert the Following Pages

28-i......................................28-i
28-1 & 28-2...............................28-1 & 28-2
32-3 & 32-4...............................32-3 & 32-4
AFAC 92-38, Pages 1 thru 6................------
(posted after page 32-4)
35-i......................................35-i
35-1......................................35-1
36-i......................................36-i
36-1 thru 36-3............................36-1 thru 36-3
42-3......................................42-3
49-i......................................49-i
49-5, 49-6 & 49-7.........................49-5, 49-6 & 49-7
------....................................51-i & 51-1
52-i......................................52-i
AFAC 92-29, E-4...........................------
52-1 thru 52-3............................52-1 thru 52-4
AA-5 & AA-6...............................AA-5 & AA-6
AA-9 thru AA-12...........................AA-9 thru AA-12
AA-21 & AA-22.............................AA-21 & AA-22
AA-29 & AA-30.............................AA-29 & AA-30
AA-37.....................................AA-37
BB-1 thru BB-30 (including IMC 92-1 &.....BB-1 thru BB-71
BB-10.1
------....................................DD-1 thru DD-37

III. MARKING INSTRUCTIONS:

Marking instructions from previous AFACs remain in effect for the AFFARS pages replaced by this AFAC. Ensure that the replacement pages inserted under this AFAC are marked as follows:

(1) Page 6-1, annotate "AFAC 88-5, E1" in the margin at 5306.3;

(2) Page 15-ii, annotate "Subpart 5315.10--Preaward, Award, and Postaward Notifications, Protests, and Mistakes, added under AFAC 92-34, E1" following the last entry under Subpart 5315.9;

(3) Page 15-2, annotate "AFAC 92-40, C1" in the margin at 5315.804; and

(4) Page 52-i, annotate "AFAC 92-26, E8" in the margin between the references to 5352.210-9000 and 5352.223-9000.

IV. EFFECTIVITY INSTRUCTIONS: This AFAC is effective January 15, 1995.

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995

List of AFFARS Effective Pages

The current edition of the AFFARS consists of the original issuance, dated January 1, 1992, as amended by change pages and interim policy letters inserted into the AFFARS by Air Force Acquisition Circulars (AFACs). Identified below is a list of the effective AFFARS pages and interim policy letters current through AFAC 92-41:

Page # AFAC Page # AFAC Page # AFAC

A-1.......92-4[4] 3-3............92-31 15-2.............92-[44]
C-1;1.1;1.2........92-40
15-2.1...........92-[44]
A-2.......92-4[4] 4-i.........Original 15-3............Original
i.........92-33 4-1.........Original 15-4..............92-17
ii........92-41 4-2............92-31 15-5............Original
1-i.......92-31 5-i.........Original 15-6............Original
1-ii......92-36 5-1............92-10 15-7............Original
1-1.......92-17 5-2............92-31 15-8............Original
1-2.......92-31 5-3............92-31 15-9..............92-17
1-3.......92-31 6-i............92-12 15-10...........Original
1-4.......92-[44] E-2 thru E-6...88-05 15-11...........Original
1-5.......92-4[4] 6-1............92-12 15-12..............92-36
1-6.......92-41 6-2............92-[44] E-1; 1.1; 1.2......92-34
1-6.......92-41 6-3............92-[44] 15-13...........Original
1-7.......92-[44] 6-4............92-36 15-14...........Original
1-8.......92-4[4] 6-5............92-[44] 16-i.............92-[44]
1-9.......92-31 7-i............92-36 E-5 thru E-10......92-04
1-10......92-36 7-1............92-[44] 16-1............Original
1-11......92-12 7-2............92-31 16-2............Original
1-12......92-12 7-3............92-36 16-3...............92-36
1-13......92-12 7-4............92-36 16-4.............92-[44]
1-14......92-12 7-5............92-[44] [16-5.............92-44]
1-15......92-31 8-i............92-31 17-i...............92-36
1-16......92-36 8-1............92-31 E-1 thru E-10......88-07
[1-16.i...92-36] 8-2.........Original 17-1...............92-17
1-17......92-[44] 8-3.........Original
1-18......92-[44] 9-i............92-36 17-2...............92-36
1-19......92-12 9-1............92-36 E-1.6 thru E-1.13 92-40
1-20......92-12 9-2............92-31 17-3...............92-36
1-21......92-12 9-3............92-31 17-4...............92-36
1-22......92-12 [10-i..........92-44] E-1 thru E-9.......92-36
1-23......92-12 [10-1..........92-44] 19-i.............92-[44]
1-24......92-12 [10-2..........92-44]
1-25......92-17 [10-3..........92-44] 19-1.............92-[44]
1-26......92-12 12-i........Original
1-27.....92-12* 12-1...........92-36
1-28.....92-12* 12-2...........92-36 19-2.............92-[44]
1-29......92-12 13-i........Original 22-i.............92-[44]
1-30......92-31 13-1...........92-17 22-1.............92-[44]
1-31......92-36 13-2........Original [22-2.............92-44]
2-i....Original 23-i............Original 23-1............Original
2-1.......92-31 13-3........Original 24-i............Original
2-2.......92-31 13-4........Original 24-1............Original
2-3.......92-17 14-i........Original
3-i.......92-31 14-1...........92-17 25-i...............92-36
3-1.......92-36 15-i...........92-[44] 25-1...............92-17
3-2.......92-31 15-ii.......Original 25-2...............92-36
15-1...........92-[44] 25-3...............92-17
25-4...............92-36

*Pages 1-27 & 1-28, in the heading, make a pen and ink correction to add "AFAC 92-12" in front of "June 15, 1992."

Page A-1
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-4[4] January 15, 1995
List of AFFARS Effective Pages

Page # AFAC Page # AFAC Page # AFAC

27-i......92-10 49-2......92-36
49-3...Original
49-4...Original
27-1......92-10
28-i......[92-44]
28-1......92-[44] 49-5....................[92-44]
28-2......92-31 49-6....................92-02
29-i...Original 49-7....................92-[44]
29-1...Original 50-i.................Original
32-i...Original 50-1....................92-31
32-1...Original 50-2....................92-17
32-2...Original 50-3....................92-17
32-3...,,,[92-44] 50-4.................Original
32-4......92-[44] 50-5.................Original
[] [51-i..................92-44]
[51-1..................92-44]
52-i.................Original
33-i...Original E-8.....................92-26
33-1......92-31 []
33-2......92-31 52-1...................[92-44]
33-3...Original 52-2...................[92-44]
33-4......92-36 52-3...................[92-44]
33-5......92-36 [52-4..................[92-44]
53-i.................Original
33-6......92-31 53-i.................Original
33-7......92-31 90-i.................Original
33-8......92-17 90-1.................Original
35-i......92-[44] 90-2.................Original
35-1......92-[44]
36-i......[92-44] Appendix AA
36-1...Original AA-1 thru AA-[5]........92-33
36-2......[92-44] [AA-6...................92-44
AA-7 thru AA-9..........92-33
AA-10 thru AA-12........92-44
AA-13 thru AA-20........92-33
AA-21...................92-44
AA-22 thru AA-28........92-33
AA-29...................92-44
AA-30 thru AA-36........92-33
AA-37...................92-44]

36-3......[92-44] Appendix BB
37-i......92-10 []
E-3.......92-04 BB-1 thru BB-[71........92-44]
37-1...Original []
39-i...Original
39-1......92-36
42-i...Original
42-1......92-31 Appendix CC
42-2...Original CC-1 thru CC-27........92-41
42-3......92-[44]
43-i...Original [Appendix DD
DD-1 thru DD-37........92-44]
43-1...Original
45-i...Original
45-1...Original
45-2......92-17
46-i...Original
46-1......92-12
46-2...Original
47-i...Original
47-1...Original
49-i......92-[44]
49-1...Original

[ ]

Page A-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-31 August 1, 1993 5301.304
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM

Cite Title OPR

Part 32 Contract Financing AQCP

Part 33 Protests, Disputes and Appeals AQCX

Part 34 Major System Acquisition AQCS

Part 35 Research and Development AQCS Contracting

Part 36 Construction and Architect AQCO
Engineer Contracts

Part 37 Service Contracting AQCO

Part 38 Federal Supply Schedule AQCO
Contracting

Part 39 Acquisition of Information AQCO Resources

Part 41 Acquisition of Utility Services AQCO

Part 42 Contract Administration and AQCP
Reporting

Part 43 Contract Modifications AQCS

Part 44 Subcontracting Policies and AQCP
Procedures

Part 45 Government Property AQCP

Part 46 except Quality Assurance AQXM
46.7 Warranties AQCS

Part 47 Transportation AQCO

Part 48 Value Engineering AQXM

Part 49 Termination of Contracts AQCP

Part 50 except Extraordinary Contractual Action AQCX

250.403 Special procedures for unusually AQCS
hazardous or nuclear risks

Part 51 Use of Government Sources by AQCO
Contractors

Part 52 Solicitation Provisions See the Subpart and Contract Clauses that prescribes the clause or provision.
Part 53 Forms See the Subpart
for each form
Part 5390 Contracting Support for AQCO
Specific Air Force Acquisitions

DFARS Appendices
Appendix TITLE OPR
A Armed Services Board of AQCX
Contract Appeal
B Coordinated Acquisition AQCO
Assignments
C Contractor Purchasing AQCP
System Reviews
D Component Breakout AQXM
E DoD Spare Parts Breakout Program AQCS F Material Inspection and AQXM
Receiving Report
G Activity Address Numbers AQCO

AFFARS Appendices
Appendix TITLE OPR
AA Formal Source Selection for AQCS Major Acquisitions
BB Streamlined Source Selection AQCS
Procedures
ZZ Staffing Regulatory Contracting AQCS
Approval Documents

SUBPART 5301.3AGENCY ACQUISITION REGULATIONS

{5301.301} Policy. The AFFARS is prepared and maintained by the Assistant for FAR System, Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting) (SAF/AQCF). Major commands, centers within AFMC, and the FOAs and DRUs identified in 5301.60191 may issue FAR, DFARS and AFFARS supplements, if essential to their particular needs.

{5301.304} Agency control and compliance procedures.
(a) Major command, FOA, and DRU directors of contracting shall establish procedures to ensure that all FAR supplements issued within their commands comply with the control and maintenance concepts under this subpart. Submit procurement policies, regulations, procedures, clauses and forms that require approval by the Director, Defense Procurement to SAF/AQCF for processing. The request shall include a
1-3
5301-304 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM
detailed justification using the format at DFARS 201.2011. SAF/AQCF will staff each request through the Secretariat and arrange for publication in the Federal Register. The requesting activity will be responsible for evaluating public comments and preparing a final package for SAF/AQCF to submit to the Director of Defense Procurement.
(b) Major commands, FOAs, and DRUs shall send two copies of their FAR Supplement and changes when they are issued to SAF/AQCF, 1060 Air Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1060.

SUBPART 5301.4DEVIATIONS FROM THE FAR

{5301.402} Policy.
(3) Submit deviation requests as follows
(i) Major commands, FOAs, and DRUs shall submit requests for class deviations and individual deviations from the five FAR/DFARS parts and subparts listed in DFARS 201.402(1)(i) to SAF/AQCF for processing to the Director of Defense Procurement, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology), USD(A&T)DP for approval.
(ii) The Head of a Contracting Activity (HCA) and those designees identified in 5301.60191 are authorized to approve individual deviations for Other Contracting (see 5302.101). In addition, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition), ASAF(A), who is the HCA for all programs (Major, Selected, and Other Programs see 5302.101), has delegated the authority to approve individual deviations for contracts for all programs to the HQ AFMC Deputy Chief of Staff (DCS) for Contracting, and for any programs executed within other major commands, to the command director of contracting. This authority may be exercised by the DCS, Associate DCS, and the Assistant DCS.

SUBPART 5301.5AGENCY AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

{5301.501} Solicitation of agency and public views.

{5301.50190} Procedures for publicizing in the Federal Register.
(a) Proposed Federal Register notices shall be typewritten and doublespaced. The Air Force has been assigned Chapter 53 of 48 Code of Federal Register (CFR). Therefore, when preparing Federal Register Notices, the responsible activity shall number the FAR supplement as indicated in the following examples::(SIC)
(1) An ACC supplement to FAR 1.402 would be referred to as 5301.402 (ACC).
(2) Product or Air Logistics Centers within AFMC shall cite major command and activity titles, such as 5301.402 (AFMC/ESC) or 5352.2259000 (AFMC/ESC).
(b) Forward proposed Federal Register notices through the major command, FOA, DRU director of contracting to SAF/AQCF.

SUBPART 5301.6CONTRACTING AUTHORITY
AND RESPONSIBILITIES

{5301.601} General.

{5301.60190} Agency head.
As Agency Head, the Secretary of the Air Force establishes policies for, and directs and supervises the Department's activities with respect to contracting and related matters. The General Counsel, as the Secretary's legal advisor, is the final authority on all legal questions. By delegation of authority from the Secretary, established policies are implemented and other appropriate instructions are issued to lower echelons by the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition), ASAF(A), and the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting), SAF/AQC.
[Amended per AFAC 92-44]
{5301.60191} Establishment of heads of contracting activities.
(a) The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition), ASAF(A), is HCA for Major, Selected and Other Programs (see 5302.101). The commanders of the organizations specified in DFARS Subpart 202.1 are designated as HCAs for Other Contracting only (see 5302.101):
(1) Air Combat Command.
(2) Air Education and Training Command.
(3) Air Mobility Command.
(4) Air Force Materi[e]l Command.
(5) Air Force Space Command.
(6) Pacific Air Forces.
(7) United States Air Forces in Europe.

1-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5301.601-92
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM

HCAs may designate the headquarters staff officer with overall responsibility for contracting in the organization to exercise any delegable HCA authority (see the definition "Designee" at 5302.101). In addition, HCAs may designate an individual to approve justifications under FAR 6.304(a)(3), provided the individual meets the requirements of FAR 6.304(a)(3)(i) or (ii) and is in a position in the organization no lower than the procuring activity competition advocate who is designated to exercise the authority of FAR 6.304(a)(2).
(b) The Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting), SAF/AQC, is the HCA for the following organizations:
(1) [11th Support Wing].
(2) Air Intelligence Agency.
(3) Air Force Reserve.
(4) Air Force Special Operations Command.
(5) USAF Academy.
The commanders of these organizations are hereby designated the "Designee" to the HCA (see 5302.101), with the power of redelegation not below the level of the staff officer with overall responsibility for contracting in the organization.
(c) [] [C]ommanders of Air Force unified command components deployed in support of JCS declared contingency operations or contingency exercises are hereby designated the "Designee" to the HCA (see 5302.101). Appendix CC further describes the flow of contracting authority in support of overseas contingencies and exercises.
(d) Commanders of major commands, FOAs, and DRUs, who are not designated HCAs, but who have a need for one of the HCA authorities prescribed in the FAR, DFARS, or this Supplement, shall submit a request for such authority to the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting), SAF/AQC.

{5301.60192} Delegation of general contracting authority.
(a) The Secretary of the Air Force by Secretary of the Air Force Order (SAFO) 650.4, effective 21 May 1992, in conjunction with SAFO 100.1, dated 1 May, 1990, delegated general contracting authority to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition), ASAF(A), the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)[(PDASAF(A))], the [Principal] Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition [& Management]), [(P]DASAF(A[&M])[)], and the Deputy Assistant Secretary (DAS) (Contracting). This authority is hereby redelegated by the DAS (Contracting) to the commanders of the organizations identified in DFARS Subpart 202.1 and 5301.60191 for Other Contracting only (see 5302.101). All previous delegations of general contracting authority are rescinded. This delegation is a general one, and all other existing or future delegations, regulations, or directives issued by competent authority, to the extent to which they would, expressly or by reasonable implication, limit the scope of or impose conditions or restrictions upon the exercise of the general authorities cited in the above referenced delegation instruments, shall be controlling. The authority delegated by SAFO 650.4 may be redelegated with or without the authority to make successive redelegations and under such terms, conditions, and limitations as may be deemed appropriate. This general contracting authority includes authority to enter into, execute, and approve contracts.
(b) ASAF(A) has delegated to the [][P]DASAF(A[&M])[], the following specific authorities--
(1) Authority to approve, without authority to redelegate, acquisition plans (APs) as specified at 5307.103-90(b)(1); and
(2) Source Selection Authority (SSA), with authority to redelegate, for those Communications and Computer Acquisitions designated as a MAIS or estimated to require $100 million or more and not assigned to a PEO.
(c) [ASAF]([A]) and [] [DAS] retain general contracting authority. The following authorities for Major, Selected, and Other Programs are hereby delegated by the [DAS] (Contracting):
(1) Through Program Executive Officers (PEOs) designated by ASAF(A), to Buying Office Contracting Official (BOCO) under the PEO, the authority to enter into, execute, and approve contracts (including change orders, supplemental agreements, and other amendments to contracts), letter contracts and other contractual actions, including terminations and settlements, for assigned Major and Selected Programs. This authority may be redelegated to contracting officers within or supporting the program office under such terms, conditions, and limitations as may be deemed appropriate.
(2) To Designated Acquisition Commanders (DACs), the authority to enter into, execute, and approve contracts (including change orders, supplemental agreements, and other amendments to contracts), letter contracts, and other contractual actions, including terminations and settle-

1-5
5301.601-92 AFAC 92-41 June 20, 1994 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM

ments, for Other Programs and for Major Programs within their purview and not assigned to a PEO. This authority may be redelegated with or without the authority to make successive redelegations and under such terms, conditions, and limitations as may be deemed appropriate.
(3) To the commanders of organizations identified in DFARS 202.1 and the FOAs and DRUs at 5301.60191, the authority to enter into, execute, and approve contracts (including change orders, supplemental agreements, and other amendments to contracts), letter contracts, and other contractual actions, including terminations and settlements, for any programs within their purview and not included in (c)(1) or (2) above. This authority may be redelegated with or without the authority to make successive redelegations and under such terms, conditions, and limitations as may be deemed appropriate.
(4) The authorities delegated in (c)(1), (2) and (3) above may be executed only by contracting officers appointed under 5301.603 and are subject to the business clearance and contract clearance requirements of Subpart 5301.90.
(d) The ASAF(A) delegates the following specific contracting authorities to the PEOs/DACs for their assigned programs:
(1) Chair Acquisition Strategy Panels (ASPs) under 5307.104-91.
(2) Approve acquisition plans (APs) below the thresholds that require ASAF(A) approval (5307.103).
(3) Approve Justifications and Approvals (J&As) within statutory thresholds (see FAR 6.304(a)(3) and 5306.304(a)(3)).
(4) Approve business clearances in accordance with 5301.90.
(5) Approve the issuance of undefinitized contractual actions (UCAs) and exercise other approvals under DFARS 217.74 and 5317.74.
(6) Serve as source selection authority (SSA) when delegated by ASAF(A) under AFFARS Appendix AA. Automatically serve as Source Selection Authority for all source selections when the source selection value for the instant contract action is estimated below $500,000,000 for production and below $300,000,000 for RDT&E unless this authority is retained by the ASAF(A). For Source Selection Activity, where the instant contract action is estimated below $500, 000, 000 for production contract actions and below $300,000,000 for RDT&E contract actions, formal or streamlined source selection procedures may be used. Whenever ASAF(A) is the SSA, the procedures contained in AFFARS Appendix AA must be followed. For Communications and Computer Acquisition contract actions, the PEO automatically serves as SSA when the instant contract action is estimated below $100,000,000.
(7) Normally serve as source selection advisory council (SSAC) chairperson when ASAF(A) is the SSA under AFFARS Appendix AA.
(8) Serve as Fee Determining Official (FDO) for award fee contracts, with authority to redelegate.
(9) Approve Determinations and Findings (D&Fs) below the thresholds that require ASAF(A) approval (see FAR 6.202(a) and 5306.202(a)).
(e) In support of ASAF(A) as the HCA for programs and to provide consistent, expert staff support on programs to PEOs and DACs, HQ AFMC DCS for Contracting shall exercise specific contracting authorities and responsibilities as a service for ASAF(A). For any Selected Programs assigned to a PEO and executed by major commands, FOAs, or DRUs other than AFMC, these authorities and responsibilities shall be exercised by the major command director of contracting. These authorities and responsibilities include:
(1) Participate in Acquisition Strategy Panels (ASPs) under 5307.104-91.
(2) Review APs that require SPE approval under
5307.1.
(3) Review J&As that require SPE approval under 5306.3.
(4) Review requests for business clearance and advise the approval authority under 5301.90.
(5) Approve contract clearances under Subpart 5301.90.
(6) Appoint contracting officers within their commands and redelegate authority to appoint contracting officers under 5301.603.
(7) Issue guidance in command FAR Supplements and contracting regulation supplements to ensure consistency between contracting for Major, Selected and Other Programs and Other Contracting (see 5302.101) in dealing with industry and to avoid proliferation of implementing instructions.
(8) Review D&Fs that require SPE approval under 5306.2.

1-6
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5301.601-92
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM

tent with 5301.60192(e)(7). Additionally, in order to effectively use manpower resources, Center Commanders and their staffs shall provide the following additional contracting support to PEO assigned Major and Selected Programs:
(1) Centralized writing of contract documents (at locations where this service is available).
(2) Distribution of contracts as required by FAR 4.2, as supplemented.
(3) Cost and price analysis and should cost analysis, in accordance with FAR 15.805 and 15.810, as supplemented.
(4) Solicitation Review Panels.
(5) Source selection support, training, and records maintenance, required by AFFARS Appendix AA and AFFARS Appendix BB.
(6) Support in using the Contractor Performance Assessment Reports, including training and records maintenance.
(7) Support for terminations and settlements in accordance with FAR Part 49, as supplemented.
All program offices are encouraged to use the Center Commander's centralized staff for consultation and guidance on contracting issues. This is strongly encouraged for issues or documents requiring higher level reviews and approvals.
(g) In addition to limitations and conditions applicable to and included with individual delegations, the following subparagraphs apply to all delegations of contracting authority and are published in this subparagraph to eliminate their repetition.
(1) Authorities delegated may be redelegated, unless expressly prohibited in individual authorizations.
(2) All redelegations, withdrawals, or rescissions of authority shall be in writing over the personal signature and title of the person vested with the authority. Delegations and redelegations shall be made to official positions and not to individuals by name, except in the case of designations of contracting officers and representatives of contracting officers.
(i) PEOs will provide a copy of all redelegations, withdrawals, or rescissions of authority to the implementing acquisition command DCS for Contracting for retention.
(ii) The implementing acquisition command DCS for Contracting will, at the PEO's request, prepare written redelegations, withdrawals, or rescissions of authority for the PEOs signature.
(3) Delegations of authority do not affect the authority of the delegator to exercise any of the authority delegated or to issue instructions concerning the exercise of such authority.
(4) In the absence of a person occupying a position to which authority has been delegated, the authority may be exercised by the person who is occupying the position in an "acting" capacity. "Absence" means absent from the installation, on leave, or temporary duty travel. In cases of extreme emergency "absence" may be construed to mean absence from the office regardless of whereabouts, except it does not apply to redelegations of authority which must be accomplished by the person occupying the position to which authority has been delegated.
(5) The business clearance and contract clearance approval authorized by delegations of authority shall be made in person by the individual(s) occupying the position to which the authority has been delegated. Execution of such approval by one individual for, or over the signature of, another is unauthorized. Persons serving in an acting capacity shall execute authority as delegated, over their own name with the signature element stating the capacity in which they are acting.
(6) When contracting authority is limited as to dollar amount, the limitation includes:
(i) Any contract instrument initially involving a sum in excess of the dollar limitation considering the aggregate of obligated and committed funds and any potential "connecting charge" or "termination liability" established in it;
(ii) Contracts firmly negotiated for the total cost of the program but which are funded for less than total cost of the program as firmly negotiated;
(iii) The estimated dollar amount of supplies and services to be purchased during the contract period for requirements and indefinite quantity contracts. Such contracts are required to include on their face, as an administrative recital, a bona fide estimate of the aggregate amount;
(iv) Any contract instrument exceeding the dollar limitation which increases the allotment of funds for reimbursement under a costreimbursement or timeandmaterials type of contract;

1-7
5301.601-92 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM

(v) Any contract modification either increasing or decreasing the value of the contract by more than the dollar limitations specified by the HCA, or designee;
(vi) Any contract modification containing both increases and decreases when the aggregate value of the changes exceeds the dollar limitations specified by the HCA, or designee regardless of the net amount of the modification; and
(vii) Utility contracts when the estimated annual service charge plus the connection or termination charge, if any, exceeds the dollar limitation.
(7) Requirements aggregating more than the dollar amount of the contracting authority delegated shall not be broken down into more than one purchase transaction for the purpose of avoiding authority limitations.
(h) In AFMC, every program will normally have two Senior Center Contracting Officials (SCCOs) and two Buying Office Contracting Officials (BOCOs) comprising two teams. One team (an SCCO and a BOCO) will support the System Program Director (SPD) and the other will support either a System Support Manager (SSM) or a Development Support Manager (DSM). Unless otherwise specified, the team referred to as "the responsible SCCO/BOCO" will be the one where the contracting is actually being accomplished. The SCCO at Space and Missile Systems Center may delegate to the BMO Deputy for Contracting the authority to act as SCCO for BMO contract actions (e.g., acquisition plans and J&As) in support of Major or Selected Programs assigned to a PEO.

{5301.60193} Contracting for operational, manned aircraft. The PEO/DAC shall notify SAF/AQ, through SAF/AQCS of any impending contract action for operational manned aircraft that is not expected to exceed $200M. This notice shall be in writing, made prior to finalizing the acquisition strategy, and include the program name, estimated dollar value, location of the buying activity, type of program (PEO or DAC), proposed acquisition strategy, and any other pertinent information. SAF/AQ will use this information to determine the extent of its involvement in the acquisition. Allow 30 calendar days for processing after receipt by SAF/AQCS. Notification by FAX at (703) 6147596 is acceptable.

{5301.60194} Contracting support in emergency situations. Contracting support is an essential element of the Air Force response to cntingency operations such as military action, natural disasters and other similar situations. While the precise nature and scope of the contracting support to these contingencies is difficult to predict, it is clear that detailed planning and training are essential elements to effective contracting participation in these contingencies. In addition, because contingency operations may require temporary deployment of contracting officers to another command or theater, either CONUS or overseas, organizational responsibilities and the flow of contracting authority may also be affected. Appendix CC describes the Air Force Contingency Operational Contracting Support Program (COCSP) and provides policies, assigns responsibilities, and implementing procedures for contracting in support of contingency situations.

(The next page is 1-9)

1-8
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-36 March 1, 1994 5301.9006-5
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM
actions under $100,000,000 and support/sustainment actions under $50,000,000 will be the Senior Center Contracting Official (SCCO) or Buying Office Contracting Official (BOCO) where the contracting is actually being accomplished, even if the System Program Director is located elsewhere.
(3) The SCCO at SMC may redelegate Table I authorities vested in them to Deputy for Contracting at the Ballistic Missile Organization (BMO/PK) for Major or

(The next page is 1-17)

1-16.1

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5301.9006-8
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM
Selected Programs assigned to a PEO. The SCCO at SMC is authorized to designate BMO/PK as a BOCO for Other Programs.
(4) When clearance authority is delegated by letter, modify the wording in paragraph 1 of the clearance document shown in Figure 1D or 1E, as appropriate. For example, if AFMC/PK delegates contract clearance then the clearance document should read substantially as follows:

"As the contract clearance approving authority delegated by AFMC/PK letter dated____________, I hereby approve the referenced (b) request."

(b) For PEO programs managed outside AFMC, the business clearance approving authority will be the PEO. The business clearance reviewing authority and the contract clearance approving authority for these programs will be the major command director of contracting; and
(c) To the commanders of major commands identified in DFARS 202.1 and FOAs, and DRUs in AFFARS 5301.60191 for any programs within their purview and not included in (a) above. This includes the authority to establish business clearance approving and reviewing authorities and contract clearance approving authorities.
(d) Commanders of Procuring Activities identified in 5306.304(a)(2)(i) not specifically delegated authority in (a) thru (c) above, but who have a need for clearance authority, shall submit a request for such authority to the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting), SAF/AQC.

{5301.90066} Clearance requirements established by major commands and suborganizations.
(a) The DACs will use the clearance procedures in 4301.9007 through 5301.9012. HQ AFMC/PK shall provide functional support as specified in Table I.
(b) For the lower thresholds in AFMC and all contractual actions within the major command or suborganization's purview, the commander, through the commander's principal staff officer responsible for contracting, shall establish appropriate internal business clearance and contract clearance procedures for major programs not assigned to a PEO and Other Programs. These procedures shall be consistent with the following:
(1) Internal procedures shall be consistent with those in 5301.9007 through 5301.9012, and enable local management to achieve the objectives of the clearance process stated in 5301.9001.
(2) Normally, the BCRA for a given contractual action shall be the RFP reviewer and CCAA for that action.
(3) The review process shall provide an independent assessment of the proposed contractual action.
(4) Organizations other than the designated BCRA or CCAA shall not conduct reviews in accordance with 5301. However, the local staff is available, in a consulting role, to provide advice and assistance in order to improve the quality of the product. Contracting officers should use available staff expertise throughout their development of solicitations and contracts.
(c) All command and suborganization FAR supplements regarding the clearance process are subject to review by SAF/AQC.

{5301.90067} Relationship between the business clearance and source selection processes. In competitive acquisitions, the business clearance process occurs during the course of the ongoing source selection process. The following relationships apply:
(a) The source selection authority (SSA) performs the role and responsibilities of the business clearance approving authority, except when ASAF(A) is the source selection authority for a Major or Selected Program acquisition. In those cases, the SSAC Chairperson, normally the PEO, shall be the business clearance approving authority, unless the SSA specifies otherwise.
(b) Business clearance is a necessary step leading to the source selection authority's decision to either (1) issue a request for Best and Final Offer (BAFO), or (2) award without discussions.
(c) The business clearance process is completed prior to the related source selection event (e.g., briefing to the SSA in the case of award without discussions) or decision (e.g., SSA approval to end discussions and issue the request for BAFO).

{5301.90068} Postaward Review. All acquisitions are subject to postaward review of the resulting contract(s). The reviewing authority shall perform postaward reviews for the purposes of evaluating and continuously improving processes and policies, using a representative sampling of field contracting actions. Only documents specifically requested by the reviewing authority must be submitted for postaward review.

1-17
5301.9006-9 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5301--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM

{5301.90069} USD(A&T) Review of Request for Proposals and Contracts.
(a) USD(A&T) may require review of RFPs and contracts for ACAT ID programs (see DoDI 5000.2) in demonstration/validation, engineering and manufacturing development, or initial production phase prior to release/award or announcing the selected offerer(s). For purposes of USD(A&T) review, Initial Production means first LRIP buy only. For these programs, the PEO/DAC shall notify SAF/AQC, with an informational copy to HQ AFMC/PK, not later than fortyfive days prior to scheduled RFP release, announcement of selected offerer(s), or contract award. The following information shall be provided:
(1) Program Name.
(2) Brief program description, including current phase.
(3) A description of the planned acquisition action, including estimated dollar value and the type (CPAF, CPIF, FPIF, etc.) of contract. Describe any options that are included and their pricing arrangements including contract type and whether firmly priced or NTE.
(4) Provide the planned date for the action, and if that date is critical, the program impact if it is not completed on time.
(5) In sole source or followon actions or downselects in which the competitors are publicly known, provide the contractor(s) name(s).
(b) Within five days of receiving the PEO's/DAC's notification, SAF/AQCS will notify USD(A&T) of the pending action and request a determination if a review is desired.
(c) For those actions selected by USD(A&T) for review, SAF/AQCS will notify the PEO/DAC and AFMC/PK. Once an action is identified for review, the RFP/contract (including the statement of work and specification) shall simultaneously be submitted to AFMC/PK and SAF/AQCS for review. After receipt of the documents for review AFMC/PK and SAF/AQCS will normally have up to 15 working days to complete their review. AFMC/PK will act as the single focal point to coordinate issues/comments with the appropriate SPO. The simultaneous SAF/AQCS and AFMC/PK reviews shall be to (1) give these organizations an opportunity to become familiar with the RFP/Contract in order to relay or answer USD(A&T) questions and (2) identify potential USD(A&T) policy issues relevant to the instant RFP/Contract.
(d) If an action is selected for review, the PEO should revise the acquisition schedule as appropriate. The RFP or contract, when approved for release by the PEO, shall be submitted to SAF/AQCS in three copies.

{5301.9007} Solicitation review.
(a) All solicitations must be reviewed if the resulting contract action is expected to require business clearance in accordance with 5301.90063. The reviewing authority for the contemplated business clearance shall be the reviewing authority for the RFP, except as prescribed in Table I for noncompetitive acquisitions. Table I prescribes the reviewing authority for RFPs, both competitive and noncompetitive, by type of program, type of action and dollar value of action.
(b) The contracting officer shall send the Request for RFP Review in the format presented in Figure 1A, with the RFP and supporting file to the reviewing authority before issuance or concurrent with issuance, at the contracting officer's option. When time permits, the contracting officer should send the RFP before issuance, so feedback can be incorporated without amending the solicitation.
(c) The RFP reviewing authority is responsible for ensuring that the solicitation implements the approved acquisition strategy and that its terms and conditions are sound. For competitive solicitations, the reviewing authority shall complete the review within seven working days after receiving the RFP. The Contracting Officer shall use best efforts to implement recommendations, provide additional data and resolve matters as much as possible with the reviewing authority. In the event issues cannot be resolved, either the reviewing or approving authority may raise the issue to SAF/AQ for resolution. (See 5301.90062).

{5301.9008} Content of the Request for Business Clearance (RBC).
(a) RBC Format and Content. The RBC shall contain information in the format presented in Figure 1B.
(b) Related Documents. The contracting officer shall provide the following documents, as applicable, with the RBC. (In Major or Selected Program competitive acquisitions, these documents will normally be retained for onsite review by the reviewing authority's staff (See 5301.9009(c)(1)).
(1) The Request for Proposals, including any amendments;
(2) The preliminary Price Negotiation Memorandum

1-18
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-12 June 15, 1992
PART 5306--COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS

{5306.003} Definitions.
As used in this part, "commencement of negotiations" means the following:
(a) For noncompetitive negotiations, the acquisition cycle may proceed up to, but not including, the start of discussions with offerors for the purpose of reaching agreement on all aspects of the proposal, including terms and conditions and the pricing arrangement. Audits and factfinding necessary to evaluate the proposal and develop the government's negotiation objectives may be conducted.
(b) For competitive negotiations, the acquisition cycle may proceed up to, but not including, competitive range determination if the competitive range determination will result in the elimination of an offeror; and may otherwise proceed up to, but not including, issuing the request for Best and Final Offer (BAFO).

SUBPART 5306.2FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

{5306.202} Establishing or maintaining alternative sources.
(a) The following officials are authorized (nondelegable) to sign the determination and findings (D&F) in support of proposed actions under FAR 6.202(a):
(1) The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition) (ASAF(A)) for all contractual actions requiring acquisition plan (AP) approval by the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) (see 5307.103(g)(4));
(2) The PEO for all contractual actions for Major and Selected Programs (see 5302.101) assigned to a PEO, except for those that require ASAF(A) approval under (a)(1);
(3) The DAC for all contractual actions for Major or Other Programs (see 5302.101) assigned to a DAC, except for those that require ASAF(A) approval under (a)(1); and
(4) HCAs, as specified in 5301.60191, for all contractual actions for Other Contracting (see 5302.101), except for those that require ASAF(A) approval under (a)(1).
(b) For contract actions under (a)(1) above, the contracting officer shall submit the proposed D&F to SAF/AQCS concurrently with the request for AP approval. The contracting officer will follow the J&A procedures set forth in 5306.304(a)(4)(90) when processing the D&F. The solicitation shall not be issued until after the D&F is signed by the SPE.
(c) For AFMC PEO actions, the Senior Center Contracting Official (SCCO) shall be afforded three working days to review/comment on D&Fs prior to submission to the PEO. For AFMC DAC actions, Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official coordination shall be obtained on all D&Fs.

See AFAC 88-5, E1
SUBPART 5306.3OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

{5306.302} Circumstances permitting other than full and open competition.

{5306.3024} International Agreement.
(c)(70) The document referred to in DFARS 206.3024(c)(i) should be titled, "International Agreement Competitive Restrictions" (IACR).
(i) For Major and Selected Programs (see 5302.101) assigned to a Program Executive Officer (PEO), the responsibility for preparing the IACR document is delegated to the Buying Office Contracting Official (BOCO). The competition advocate at the respective AFMC product or logistics center is delegated approval authority.
(ii) For Major Programs not assigned to a PEO and Other Programs (see 5302.101), the responsibility for preparing the IACR document is delegated to the AFMC Senior Center Contracting Official. The competition advocate at these respective locations is delegated approval authority.
(iii) For Other Contracting, the responsibility for preparing the IACR document is delegated to the principal staff officer (or designee) responsible for contracting for the command, FOA, or DRU. The command, FOA, or DRU competition advocate (or designee) is delegated approval authority. For AFMC, Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Officials are delegated the responsibility for preparing the IACR and the respective competition advocate the approval authority.

{5306.3027} Public interest.
(c) Limitations. (3) The contracting officer shall prepare the justification to support the determination and forward it through command channels to arrive at SAF/AQCS 30 cal-

6-1
5306.302-7 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5306--COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS
endar days prior to the scheduled solicitation release. AFMC Contracting Officers will follow the J&A processing procedures set forth in 5306.304(a)(4)(90). The solicitation shall not be released until after the determination has been made in writing.

{5306.303} Justifications.

{5306.3031} Requirements.
(c) If a change to the contract exceeds the scope of the Justification and Approval (J&A), the contracting officer shall amend the J&A and obtain required approvals prior to awarding the modification. The cumulative dollar value of the acquisition, inclusive of the proposed modification, shall dictate the level of approval as defined in FAR 6.304.
(d) The contracting officer shall forward a copy of the approved J&A to SAF/AQCO for any contract action which is subject to the Trade Agreements Act (see FAR 25.4) and will be awarded using other than competitive procedures pursuant to FAR 6.3023(a)(2)(i) or 6.3027.

{5306.3032} Content.
(a)(2) Include the type of contract, the share and ceiling arrangements (when applicable), and a description of the cost and schedule risk.

{5306.303290} Justification Review Document.
A justification for a proposed contract action over $10 million shall contain a cover sheet entitled "Justification Review Document (JRD)." The cover sheet shall identify the name of the program and the specific authority under which the proposed contract will be awarded. In addition, the JRD shall include typed names and titles, and bear the signatures of the contracting officer, the local competition advocate, the chief of the contracting office, the local legal reviewer, the program manager, and if applicable, the PEO, DAC or TEO. For AFMC PEO actions, the JRD shall be signed by the Buying Office Contracting Official. For AFMC DAC actions, the JRD shall be signed by the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official and the BOCO. If there is no program manager, then the individual responsible for establishing the requirement shall sign the cover sheet.

{5306.303291} Changes.
(a) If a change occurs or additional information becomes available prior to award which significantly alters the J&A, the contracting officer shall submit the revised information to the justification approval authority with a statement assessing impact on the J&A.
(b) If, prior to award, the contract action dollar value increases to the extent that it exceeds the previous approving official's authority, the contracting officer shall submit a copy of the previously approved J&A with a cover letter requesting reapproval from the appropriate higher authority. The contract shall not be awarded until approved in writing.

{5306.304} Approval of the justification.
(a)(2)(i) The activities listed below are "procuring activities" referenced in FAR 6.304(a)(2):

Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting), SAF/AQC
11th Support Wing
Air Combat Command
Air Education and Training Command
Air Mobility Command
Air Force Materiel Command
Headquarters, Air Force Materiel Command
-Aeronautical Systems Center
--Aeronautical Systems Center/OL-PK
--Aeronautical Systems Center/PKW
--Wright Laboratory
-Aerospace Guidance and Metrology Center
Air Force Development Test Center
Air Force Flight Test Center
Air Force Office of Scientific Research
Arnold Engineering Development Center
Electronic Systems Center
--Communications Systems Center
-Rome Laboratory
--Standard Systems Center
Human Systems Center
Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center
Ogden Air Logistics Center
Sacramento Air Logistics Center
San Antonio Air Logistics Center
Space and Missile Center
--Detachment 10/Space and Missile Center
--Phillips Laboratory
WarnerRobins Air Logistics Center
Air Force Reserve
Air Force Space Command
Air Force Special Operations Command
Air Intelligence Agency
Pacific Air Forces
United States Air Forces in Europe
USAF Academy

(ii) For Major and Selected Programs, the competition advocate at the AFMC product or logistics center may approve the justification.

6-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5306.304(a)(4)(91)
PART 5306--COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS

(a)(3) PEOs and DACs may delegate this authority to an official who meets the criteria of FAR 6.304(a)(3). For AFMC PEO actions, the SCCO shall be afforded three working days to review/comment on any J&A over $1,000,000 prior to submission to the approving official. For AFMC DAC actions, the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official shall coordinate on any J&A over $1,000,000. The contracting officer shall not release the solicitation until the justification is approved in writing (but see FAR 6.3022(c)(1)).
(a)(4)(70) For a proposed contract over $10,000,000 but not exceeding $50,000,000, the SPE has delegated approval authority to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition) (SAF/AQ).
(a)(4)(90) Submit justifications requiring approval by the SPE or Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition & Management) (PDASAF(A&M)) to SAF/AQCS. For AFMC PEO actions, the SCCO shall be afforded three working days to review/comment on all J&As requiring approval by the SPE or DASAF(A) prior to submittal to SAF/AQCS. For AFMC DAC actions, all justification requiring approval by the SPE or PDASAF(A&M) will be coordinated with the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official prior to submittal to SAF/AQCS. SAF/AQCS transmits the approved justification to the contracting activity by memorandum entitled, "Final Acquisition Action Approval (FAAA)," which contains any restrictions (exceptions) which may have been imposed. SAF/AQCS prepares and processes the FAAA Plan 30 days for staffing and issuance of the FAAA after receipt by SAF/AQCS. SAF/AQCS shall monitor clearance of the Exceptions noted in the FAAA. Exceptions marked with an asterisk that stop the acquisition cycle must be cleared by an amendment to the FAAA. Exceptions that do not stop the acquisition cycle do not require an amendment to the FAAA, but must be cleared through SAF/AQCS. The contracting officer is responsible for clearing the exception. For AFMC PEO actions, the SCCO shall be afforded three working days to review/comment on the documentation necessary to clear the exception prior to submittal by the contracting officers, through the PEO to SAF/AQCS with an informational copy to AFMC/PK. For AFMC DAC actions and Other Contracting, the contracting officer is responsible for obtaining the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official's coordination and submitting the documentation necessary to clear the exception through the DAC or MAJCOM to SAF/AQCS with an informational copy to AFMC/PK.
(a)(4)(91) When an acquisition requires approval of both an acquisition plan (AP) and J&A, the documents should be submitted concurrently. For these combination actions, plan 45 days for staffing and issuance of the FAAA after receipt by SAF/AQCS. For an acquisition requiring FAAA by the SPE or the PDASAF(A&M), the following procedures apply:
(i) For Major and Selected Programs, the PEO (nondelegable) signs and submits the justification to SAF/AQCS prior to solicitation release. For AFMC, the PEO shall submit the J&A to AFMC/PK and SAF/AQCS simultaneously. AFMC/PK shall review, resolve comments and forward any J&A change pages to SAF/AQCS within 15 working days after receipt of the J&A. If comments cannot be resolved, AFMC/PK will forward unresolved comments to SAF/AQCS within 15 working days. SAF/AQCS shall begin internal review of the J&A upon receipt from the PEO and will release the document for SAF/AQ staffing after receipt of the results of the AFMC/PK review. Within five working days of receiving the J&A from the PEO, SAF/AQCS shall send the PEO and major command contracting activities written authorization identifying the 15th calendar day after the date SAF/AQCS received the justification. The contracting officer may release the solicitation on or after the specified date, unless directed otherwise by the SPE. SAF/AQCS shall verbally communicate SPE direction to stop release of the solicitation, followed up by written cancellation or amendment of the authorization to the PEO. In this case, the contracting officer shall not release the solicitation until the FAAA is signed or a revised release date is specified in the amendment. After release of the solicitation, negotiations shall not commence (see 5306.003) nor shall sealed bids be received until the FAAA is signed.
(ii) For AFMC Major Programs not assigned to a PEO and Other Programs, the DAC shall sign the justification. Procedures for processing the J&A after signature are the same as for PEO programs, except authorizations and SPE directions will be sent to the SCCO, with an information copy to AFMC/PK.
(iii) For Major, Selected or Other Programs assigned to a major command other than AFMC. After signature, the justification will be submitted to the major command DCS for Contracting, who has been delegated the responsibility for initial reviews as a service to the ASAF(A). These justifications will be forwarded to SAF/AQCS within 30 calendar days or when issues have been resolved, whichever occurs earlier. The major command's transmittal letter will address any unresolved issues and include a recommendation regarding solicitation release. Within five working days of receiving the justification from the major command, SAF/AQCS will send major command contracting activity a written authorization to release the solicitation immediately, unless major issues precluding solicitation release have been identified and the SPE has directed that the solicitation not be released. SAF/AQCS shall ver-

6-3
5306.304(a)(4)(91) AFAC 92-36 March 1, 1994 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5306--COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS
bally communicate SPE direction to stop release of the solicitation, followed up by written cancellation or amendment of the authorization. In this case, the contracting officer shall not release the solicitation until the FAAA is signed or a revised date is specified in the amendment. After the solicitation is released, negotiations shall not commence (see 5306.003) nor shallsealed bids be received until the FAAA is signed.
(iv) For Other Contracting, the HCA shall designate the official authorized to sign the justification. The HCA (or designee) may authorize solicitation release after the justification is reviewed for adequacy and forwarded to SAF/AQCS. For AFMC, the procedures for processing the J&A after signature are the same as for PEO programs, except HQ AFMC/PK may authorize solicitation release after completing J&A review. AFMC/PK will send the solicitation release authorization to the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official, with an information copy to SAF/AQCS. SAF/AQCS will forward SPE directions to the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official with an information copy to AFMC/PK. After the solicitation is issued, negotiations shall not commence (see 5306.003) nor shall sealed bids be received until the FAAA is signed.
(c) Class justifications for other than full and open competition are submitted for related supplies or services or for contracts requiring essentially identical justification. Class justifications shall describe the required supplies or services and include the estimated value for each contract action contemplated by the justification.

{5306.390} Specific make and model acquisition under the Brooks Act.
(a) For information resources requirements that are subject to the Brooks Act (40 U.S.C. 759), use of specific make and model specifications must be justified and approved in accordance with FAR 6.302 and 6.304, prior to solicitation release.
(b) Technical and requirements personnel must provide and certify as complete and accurate data necessary to support their recommendations to use specific make and model purchase descriptions for information resources requirements. The justification must address why no other type of supplies will satisfy the requirement.

6-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5306-I
PART 5306--COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS

TABLE 5306-I
Justifications and Approvals (J&As)
Approval Requirements

AUTHORITY LEVELS

Programs AFMC Programs Other Contracting
J&A Assigned Not Assigned & Programs Not
Est. Value to a PEO to a PEO Assigned in AFMC

Under $100K Contracting Officer Contracting Officer Contracting Officer

$100K - $1M Center Center
Competition Competition Competition
Advocate Advocate Advocate

$1M - $10M PEO* DAC* MAJCOM/CC**

$10M -$50M PDASAF(A&M) PDASAF(A&M) PDASAF(A&M)

Over $50M ASAF(A) ASAF(A) ASAF(A)

Notes:
*--PEO/DAC may delegate approval authority to an official meeting the criteria at FAR 6.304(a)(3).

**--See AFFARS 5306.304(a)(2)(i) for Other Contracting J&As in AFMC.

(sic)

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5307--ACQUISITION PLANNING

SUBPART 5307.1ACQUISITION PLANS

{5307.103} Agencyhead responsibilities.
(c)(i)(C) Written acquisition plans (APs) shall be prepared for the following:
(1) All Class IV and V modification acquisitions (see AFR 574) when the estimated total acquisition cost is $5,000,000 or more.
(2) All high risk Class V modifications. (See Table 2 of AFR 574.)
(3) Other acquisitions involving Other Contracting (see 5302.101) at the discretion of the principal staff officer responsible for contracting at the major command headquarters.
(d) APs for Major Programs, Selected Programs or Other Programs shall include all major subsystems, governmentfurnished equipment, major component contractual actions, and all other contracts which have a significant effect on the total program.

{5307.10490} Air Force procedures for Acquisition Plans.
(a) General. Heads of contracting activities or designees shall prescribe internal procedures to ensure compliance with the requirements in FAR 7.103, as supplemented in the DFARS and AFFARS. Such regulations shall establish internal procedures for preparing, coordinating, updating, and implementing APs, in general, and establishing review, signatory, and approval levels for APs that do not require approval by the SPE.
(b) Approval requirements.
(1) Acquisition plans for the following acquisitions require SPE approval authority has been delegated, without power to redelegate, to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition & Management)(PDASAF(A&M)).
(i) All research and development acquisitions, when the estimated total value of the contract(s) within the acquisition is over $25 million or more. However, SPE approval is not required when acting as the contracting agent for another agency (e.g., DARPA, or SDIO) to acquire basic and applied research, if that agency applied the broad agency announcement procedure as defined in FAR 6.102(d)(2).
(ii) All production acquisitions requiring determination and findings per FAR 6.202(b) when the estimated total value of the contract action(s) is $30 million or more for all years, or $15 million or more for any fiscal year.
(iii) All communications and computer acquisitions not integral to a weapon system, when the estimated total value of the contract(s) within the acquisition is over $100 or more million. Note: if the acquisition is $25 million or more in RDT&E funds, subparagraph (1) (i) above applies.
(iv) All other acquisitions that are planned noncompetitive or first time competitive when the estimated total value of the contract(s) within the acquisition is $200 million or more. APs for repetitive or followon production contracts do not require SPE approval.
(2) PEOs shall approve all acquisitions for Major and Selected Programs that have been designated PEO programs, except for acquisitions requiring SPE approval. The PEO may redelegate to the approval authority for acquisitions below $25M.
(3) DACs shall approve all acquisitions for Major Programs not assigned to a PEO and Other Programs, except for acquisitions requiring SPE approval. The DAC may redelegate approval authority for acquisitions below $25M.
(4) Other Contracting and programs not assigned to a PEO or DAC, which do not require SPE approval, shall be approved in accordance with the command procedures.
(c) APs requiring Final Acquisition Action Approval (FAAA) by the SPE.
(1) SAF/AQCS furnishes SPE AP approval to the contracting activity by memorandum entitled, "Final Acquisition Action Approval (FAAA)," outlining any restrictions (exceptions) which have been imposed. SAF/AQCS prepares and processes FAAAs. SAF/AQCS shall monitor clearance of the Exceptions noted in the FAAA in accordance with the procedures set forth in 5306.304(a)(4)(90). When an AP and justification and approval (J&A) require SPE approval, the J&A documentation should be submitted concurrently with the AP. Anticipate 45 days for staffing and issuance of the FAAA after receipt by SAF/AQCS.
(2) When AP approval by the SPE is required, the following procedures apply--
(i) APs requiring SPE approval shall be signed by the

7-1
5307.103-90(sic) AFAC 92-31 August 1, 1993 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5307--ACQUISITION PLANNING
contracting officer, chief of the contracting office, and program manager. Additionally, for AFMC PEO actions, APs requiring SPE approval shall be signed by the BOCO and for AFMC DAC actions, by the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official. The responsible PEO or DAC shall also sign the AP prior to submitting it to SAF/AQCS for SPE approval. For Other Contracting and programs not assigned to a PEO or DAC, signature shall be in accordance with command procedures.
(ii) For Major and Selected Programs, the PEO shall forward the AP to SAF/AQCS prior to solicitation release. For AFMC, the PEO shall simultaneously submit a copy of the AP to AFMC/PK. AFMC/PK shall review, resolve comments and forward any AP change pages to SAF/AQCS within 15 working days. If comments cannot be resolved, AFMC/PK will forward unresolved comments to SAF/AQCS within 15 working days. SAF/AQCS shall begin internal review of the AP upon receipt from the PEO and will release the document for SAF/AQ staffing after receipt of the results of the AFMC/PK review. Within five working days of receiving the AP from the PEO, SAF/AQCS shall send the PEO and major command contracting activities written authorization identifying the 15th calendar day after SAF/AQCS received the plan. The contracting officer may release the solicitation on or after the specified date, unless directed otherwise by the SPE. SAF/AQCS shall verbally communicate SPE direction to stop release of the solicitation, followed up by written cancellation or amendment of the authorization to the PEO. In this case, the contracting officer shall not release the solicitation until the FAAA is signed or a revised date is specified in the amendment. After release of the solicitation, negotiations shall not commence (see 5306.003) nor shall sealed bids be received until the FAAA is signed by the SPE.
(iii) For Major Programs not assigned to a PEO and Other Programs, procedures for processing the AP after signature are the same as for PEO programs, except authorization and SPE directions will be sent to the Senior Center Contracting Official with an information copy to AFMC/PK.
(iv) For Other Programs assigned outside AFMC. After signature, the AP will be submitted to the major command principal staff officer (or designee) responsible for contracting at the command headquarters, who has been delegated the responsibility for initial reviews as a service to the ASAF(A)). The AP will be forwarded by the major command to SAF/AQCS within 30 calendar days or when problems have been resolved, whichever occurs earlier. The major command's transmittal letter will address any unresolved issues and include a recommendation regarding solicitation release. Within five working days of receiving the AP from the major command, SAF/AQCS will send the major command contracting activity a written authorization to release the solicitation immediately, unless major issues precluding solicitation release have been identified and the SPE has directed that the solicitation not be released. SAF/AQCS shall verbally communicate SPE direction to stop release of the solicitation followed up by written cancellation or amendment of the authorization. In this case, the contracting officer shall not release the solicitation until the FAAA is signed or a revised release date is specified in the amendment. After the solicitation has been issued, negotiations shall not commence (see 5306.003) nor shall sealed bids be received until the FAAA is signed by the SPE.
(v) For Other Contracting, the HCA (or designee) may authorize solicitation release after the AP is reviewed for adequacy and forwarded to SAF/AQCS. For AFMC, the procedures for processing the AP after signature are the same as for PEO programs, except HQ AFMC/PK may authorize solicitation release after completing the acquisition plan review and SPE directions will be sent to the Senior Center or Laboratory Contracting Official with an information copy to SAF/AQCS. After the solicitation is issued, negotiations shall not commence (see 5306.003) nor shall sealed bids be received until the FAAA is signed.
(vi) For acquisitions citing the authority of FAR 6.3022 (unusual compelling urgency), the contracting officer shall not release the solicitation until approval is received, except when approval will unreasonably delay the acquisition. When justified in accordance with FAR 6.3022(c)(1), the solicitation may be released and the acquisition cycle continued (including contract award) prior to the signing of the FAAA. The contracting activity shall request the FAAA as early as possible.
(vii) For full and open competition acquisitions that support quick reaction capability (see AFR 575), the contracting officer may release the solicitation and continue the acquisition cycle up to, but not including contract award, prior to the signing of the FAAA. The contracting activity shall request the FAAA as early as possible.
(d) Review and coordination of AFMC Acquisition Plans.
(1) For AFMC PEO acquisitions, the SCCO shall be afforded three working days to review/comment on all APs for development/production actions (see 5302.101) of $25,000,000 or more and APs for support/sustainment actions (see 5302.101) of $15,000,000 or more prior to submission to the PEO, or other approval authority if delegated.

7-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 December 15, 1994(sic) 5307-I
PART 5307--ACQUISITION PLANNING

TABLE 5307-I
Acquisition Plan
Approval & Signature Requirements

AUTHORITY LEVELS

Programs AFMC Programs Other Contracting
Assigned Not Assigned & Programs Not
Type Action to a PEO to a PEO Assigned in AFMC
Est. Value PEO SPE**** DAC SPE**** Command/CC SPE****
R & D
$5M-$25M Approve** Approve** Approve***
$25M or more Sign Approve Sign Approve Sign Approve

First Time Competitive
$15/30M*-$200M Approve** Approve** Approve***
$200M or more Sign Approve Sign Approve Sign Approve

Production, Follow On, Not First Time Competitive
$15/30M* or more Approve** Approve** Approve***

Other, Non-Competitive
$15/30M*-$200M Approve** Approve** Approve***
$200M or more Sign Approve Sign Approve Sign Approve

Class IV/V Modification
$5M-$200M Approve** Approve** Approve***
$200M or more Sign Approve Sign Approve Sign Approve

High Risk Class V Modification
0-$200M Approve** Approve** Approve***
$200M or more Sign Approve Sign Approve Sign Approve

Alternate Source Production under FAR 6.202(b)
$15/30M* or more Sign Approve Sign Approve N/A N/A

Communications/Computer, Not Integral to a Weapon System
$15/30M*-$100M Approve** Approve** Approve***
$100M or more Sign Approve Sign Approve Sign Approve

Notes:
*--Refers to $15M or more in any fiscal year or $30M or more for all years (see DFARS 207.103(c)(i)(B)).

**--The PEO/DAC may delegate approval authority for Acquisition Plans below $25M.

***--Acquisition plans for Other Contracting and Programs not assigned to a PEO or DAC that are not subject to SPE approval shall be approved in accordance with regulations established by the major command (see AFFARS 5307.103-90(b)(4)).

****--SPE approval authority for Acquisitions Plans has been delegated, without power to redelegate, to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition & Management)(PDASAF(A&M)).

7-5

Blank Page

AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5310--SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, AND OTHER PURCHASE DESCRIPTIONS

{PART 5310}--SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, AND OTHER PURCHASE DESCRIPTIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5310.90--ELIMINATION OF USE OF CLASS I OZONE DEPLETING SUBSTANCES (ODS)

Scope of subpart...................................5310.9000 10-1
Definitions........................................5310.9001 10-1
Air Force Policy...................................5310.9002 10-1
Air Force responsibilities.........................5310.9003 10-2
Selecting commercial specifications or.............5310.9004 10-3
descriptions for Air Force use
Management of Air Force purchase descriptions......5310.9005 10-3
Contract clause....................................5310.9006 10-3

10-i

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5310--SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, AND OTHER PURCHASE DESCRIPTIONS

AFFARS Subpart 5310.90 Elimination of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS)

{5310.9000} Scope of subpart.
This part prescribes Air Force policies and procedures for eliminating the use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances in all Air Force procurements.

{5310.9001} Definitions.
"Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS)" is a substance identified as having a detrimental effect on the Earth's ozone layer. The terms Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS), Ozone Depleting Chemical (ODC), and Ozone Layer Depleting Substance (OLDS) are synonymous. Ozone Depleting Substances are Class I substances included in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and other substances identified by the Air Force. The substances covered by this policy include:
(a) Halons: 1011, 1202, 1211, 1301 and 2402;
(b) Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs): CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-13, CFC-111, CFC-112, CFC-113, CFC-114, CFC-115, CFC-211, CFC-212, CFC-213, CFC-214, CFC-215, CFC-216, and CFC-217, and the blends R-500, R-501, R-502, and R-503; and
(c) Other Controlled Substances: Carbon Tetrachloride, Methyl Chloroform, and Methyl Bromide.
"Suitable Substitute" is an alternative to ODS use that is determined to be technically, economically, and legally feasible through elimination, process, modification, or material substitution.
"Trigger Contract Modification" is a contract modification that causes the initial review of ODS requirements on a contract that was awarded before 1 Jun 93 when:
(a) The contract's value was greater than $10 on 1 Jun 93; and
(b) As a result of the modification, the contract will expire more than one year after the effective date of the modification.
"Completed ODS Evaluation" is when the requiring activity either:
(a) Issues a statement that the Government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a));
(b) Identifies a suitable substitute for the ODS and initiates action to implement the substitute; or
(c) Receives the required ODS waiver approval in accordance with Air Force ODS waiver approval policy.

{5310.9002} Air Force policy.
(a) It is Air Force policy to preserve mission readiness while minimizing dependency on Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) and their release into the environment, to help protect the earth's stratospheric ozone layer. This policy applies to:
(1) Contracts, purchase orders, leases, delivery orders and local, decentralized purchasing authorities (including IMPAC cards, SF 44s, and imprest funds);
(2) Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts;
(3) Air Force requirements procured through other agencies under authorities such as the Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535); and
(4) Purchases made by Air Force contracting organizations on behalf of other agencies.
(b) Contracts awarded on or after 1 Jun 1993, and certain contracts awarded prior to 1 Jun 1993 but modified on or after 1 Jun 1993 (See DFARS 210.002-71), may not include any specifications, standard, drawing or other document that:
(1) Requires the use of a Class I ODS in the design, manufacture, test, operation, or maintenance of any system, subsystem, item, component or process; or
(2) Establishes a requirement that can only be met by the use of a Class I ODS.
(c) Contract modifications of a solely administrative nature or for funding actions do not require a statement that the Government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a)) or a waiver approval. The following applies to all other contract modifications:
(1) Modifications to contracts awarded on or after 1 Jun 93 shall be evaluated to determine if the modification adds new work, a new ODS, or new ODS applications not previously reviewed and approved. The modification will not be issued until the requiring activity issues either

10-1
5310.9002 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5310--SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, AND OTHER PURCHASE DESCRIPTIONS

a statement that the government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a)) or obtains a waiver approval for the ODS requirements above the previously evaluated baseline.
(2) Contracts awarded before 1 Jun 93, that become subject to the statutory ODS restrictions (See DFARS 210.002-71(b)) as a result of the instant contract modification, shall be evaluated to determine if the contract, as modified, requires the use of an ODS or is written so that it can only be met by the use of an ODS. The instant contract modification is issued and becomes the "trigger contract modification." No further contract modifications may be made to the contract until the ODS evaluation is complete.
(3) Modifications to contracts awarded before 1 Jun 93, that are covered by the statutory ODS restrictions (See DFARS 210.002-71(b)) as a result of a previous trigger contract modification, shall be evaluated to determine if the instant modification adds new work, new ODS, or new ODS applications not previously reviewed and approved. The contract modification will not be issued until the requiring activity either issues a statement that the Government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a)), or obtains a waiver approval for the ODS requirements above the previously evaluated baseline.
(d) When ODS is not required in a procurement, the requiring activity must furnish a written statement to the contracting officer that the Air Force does not require the contractor to use Class I ODS in the performance of the contract (See 5310.9005(a)). The content of the written statement will be in accordance with Air Force waiver approval procedures. A copy of the written statement will be maintained in the contract file.
(e) When the Government requires the use of ODS or has written the requirement so that it can only be met by the use of an ODS, waiver approvals shall be obtained by the requiring activity in accordance with Air Force waiver approval procedures. A copy of the waiver approval document will be maintained in the contract file.

{5310.9003} Air Force responsibilities.
(a) Contracting officers shall ensure that the contract file for each contract awarded on or after 1 Jun 1993, and certain contracts awarded before 1 June 1993 but subsequently modified (See DFARS 210.002-71), contains either:
(1) A statement from the requiring activity that the Government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a)); or
(2) An approved waiver request document. This requirement does not apply to contract modifications of a solely administrative nature or for funding actions.
(b) Requiring activities are responsible for preparing, processing, and providing the statements and approval documents discussed above, to the contracting officer.
(c) Prior to contract award, if an offeror notifies the contracting officer (in accordance with the clause at 5352.210-9000(e)) that a Class I ODS is required in the performance of the proposed contract, but has not been approved for inclusion in the contract, the contracting officer shall immediately inform the requiring activity. The requiring activity, with the support of the contracting officer shall, prior to contract award, take immediate action to either:
(1) Remove the ODS requirement from the solicitation;
(2) Determine that a suitable substitute exists and modify the solicitation accordingly; or
(3) Obtain a waiver approval to include the requirement for the ODS in the solicitation.
(d) After contract award, if a contractor notifies the contracting officer (in accordance with the clause at 5352.210-9000(e)) that a Class I ODS has been required in the performance of the contract, but has not been approved for inclusion in the contract, the contracting officer shall immediately inform the requiring activity.
(1) If the contract has previously been reviewed for ODS content, the requiring activity, with the support of the contracting officer, shall take immediate action to either:
(A) Remove the ODS requirement from the contract;
(B) Determine that a suitable substitute exists and modify the contract accordingly; or
(C) Obtain a waiver approval to include the requirement for the ODS in the contract. Contract performance may continue while the requiring activity and contracting officer take necessary action described above.
(2) If the contract has not previously been reviewed for ODS content and is not covered by the statutory restrictions on ODS, the requiring activity, with the support of the contracting officer, may take action to evaluate the requirement and either:

10-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5310.011-9006
PART 5310--SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, AND OTHER PURCHASE DESCRIPTIONS
(A) Remove the ODS requirement from the contract; or
(B) Determine that a suitable substitute exists and modify the contract accordingly.

{5310.9004} Selecting commercial specifications or descriptions for Air Force use.
(a) Commercial products and commercial items as defined by FAR 11.001 and DFARS 211.7001(a), respectively, may be purchased without approved waivers, or statements that the Government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a)). Before the Government may add specifications or other restrictions on commercial products or items, that mandate the use of ODS, the requiring activity must obtain an approved waiver and provide a copy to the contracting officer.
(b) For purchases using commercial part numbers or manufacturers' part numbers, when the Government does not control configuration, specifications, standards, drawings, or other documents, neither an approved waiver nor a statement that the Government does not require ODS (See 5310.9005(a)) are necessary.
(c) When the Government controls configuration, specifications, standards, drawings, or other documents that include the use of ODS on commercial parts, the requiring activity must obtain an approved waiver to purchase the parts.
(d) The following are exceptions to the guidance in (a) and (b) above:
(1) Purchases of Class I ODS in bulk (any quantity or type) require an approved waiver, and
(2) The purchase of facility air conditioning systems, aerospace ground equipment, commercial vehicles, and other refrigeration and support equipment that use ODS as a refrigerant/coolant is prohibited.

{5310.9005} Management of Air Force purchase descriptions.
(a) The statement that the Government does not require ODS shall read as follows:
"I have reviewed the requirement, including available technical documentation, and believe that it does not require the contractor to use Class I ozone depleting substances (ODS) identified in Air Force Policy, nor is it written so that it can only be met by the use of a Class I ODS."
(b) The above statement may be documented in a variety of ways, such as being included in the item description of electronic Base Contracting Automated System requirement documents. Another example is the statement may be stamped on a Air Force Form 9, Purchase Request. It may also be included in a listing of National Stock Numbers (NSNs) or stock classes reviewed on a one-time basis, agreed between base supply activities and the local contracting office. Future purchases of these NSNs or in these stock classes would not require an individual statement.

{5310.9006} Contract clauses.
(a) If the nature of a requirement is such that the use of an ODS is certain or possible, the contracting officer shall include the clause at 5352.210-9000, "Elimination of Use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) in Air Force Procurements," in Section H of solicitations and contracts to advise the contractor of Air Force policy and ask for the contractor's voluntary assistance in notifying the Government if any ODS requirements have been overlooked.
(b) When the use of a Class I ODS has been approved, the contracting officer shall list the ODS substances, their applications/uses, and quantities in the clause at 5352.210-9000, "Elimination of Use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) in Air Force Procurements."
(c) When a contract allows for decentralized ordering by multiple ordering activities, the contracting officer shall include the clause at 5352.210-9000, "Elimination of Use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) in Air Force Procurements," in Section H of the basic solicitation and the basic contract, whether or not ODS requirements are part of the procurement. If no ODS is required, "NONE" shall be entered in the clause. This clause shall serve as notice in all potential ordering activities that an ODS review has been completed. Orders against a contract that contains the clause with "NONE" entered, may be placed without additional ODS reviews or the need for a statement from the requiring activity that "the Government does not require ODS."

10-3

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5315--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

{PART 5315}CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5315.4SOLICITATION AND RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS AND QUOTATIONS

General...........................................5315.402 151
Preparing requests for proposals (RFPs) and
requests for quotations (RFQs)....................5315.406 151
Part I The Schedule.............................5315.4062 151
Part IV Representations and instructions........5315.4065 151
Amendment of solicitations before closing date....5315.410 151

SUBPART 5315.5UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS

Air Force procedures...............................5315.506-90 151

SUBPART 5315.6SOURCE SELECTION

Reporting of source selection activity............5315.604 152 Evaluation Factors...............................5315.605 15-2
Air Force procedures for Lowest Cost (Price)
Technically Acceptable Selections...............5315.605-90 15-2
Best and final offers.............................5315.611 152
Formal Source Selection...........................5315.612 15-2

SUBPART 5315.8PRICE NEGOTIATION

Cost or pricing data..............................5315.804 152
Exemptions from or waiver of submission of
certified cost or pricing data....................5315.8043 152
Procedural requirements...........................5315.8046 152.1
Proposal analysis.................................5315.805 152.1
Price analysis....................................5315.8052 152.1
Cost analysis.....................................5315.8053(90) 152.1
Field pricing support.............................5315.8055(90) 153
Price analysis and review technique for spares/support..................................5315.805(c)(90)153
Subcontract pricing considerations................5315.806 154
General...........................................5315.8061 154
Prenegotiation objectives.........................5315.807 154
Price negotiation memorandum (PNM)................5315.808 154
Shouldcost analysis..............................5315.810 154
Estimated data prices.............................5315.873 155
Formula pricing agreements (FPA)..................5315.890 155
Description.......................................5315.8901 155
Policy............................................5315.8902 155
FPA Requirements..................................5315.8903 156
Responsibilities..................................53158904 156
FPAs negotiated by other DoD agencies.............5315.8905 157

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.) 15-i
January 1, 1992 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5315--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

Title Paragraph Page

Followup on contract audit reports................5315.891 157
General...........................................5315.8911 157
Definitions.......................................5315.8912 157
Responsibilities..................................5315.8913 158
Tracking of contract audit reports................5315.8914 159
Reporting of contract audit reports...............5315.8915 159
Resolution of contract audit reports..............5315.8916 1511
Disposition of contract audit reports.............5315.8917 1511
Recovery of funds.................................5315.8918 1511
Coordination with other agencies..................5315.8919 1512
Contract audit followup for GAO reports...........5315.89110 1512

SUBPART 5315.9PROFIT

Contracting officer responsibilities..............5315.903 1512
Reporting profit and fee statistics...............5315.975 1512

SUBPART 5313.10--PREAWARD, AWARD, AND POSTAWARD NOTIFICATIONS,
PROTESTS, AND MISTAKES, added under AFAC 92-34, E1

SUBPART 5315ILLUSTRATIONS

Status Reports on Specified Contract Audit
Reports.........................................53151 and 2 1513

15-ii
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT FAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5315--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

SUBPART 5315.4SOLICITATION AND RECEIPT
OF PROPOSALS AND QUOTATIONS

{5315.402} General. (h)(1) Responses received as a result of a proper notice of proposed sole source contract action shall be handled in the following manner:
(i) The contracting officer shall transmit the respondent's information to the technical personnel and shall request a written technical assessment of the information submitted.
(ii) The contracting officer shall use the technical assessment and other pertinent information to evaluate the response. The contracting officer's evaluation shall consider such factors as acquisition history, availability of reprocurement data, contractor capabilities, and the technical assessment.
(iii) The contracting officer shall consult with the local competition advocate.
(iv) Contractor responses to the synopsis, technical assessments, and the contracting officer's evaluation shall be included in the contract file.
(2) The contracting officer shall notify potential offerors that responded to a proper notice of proposed sole source contract action of the contracting actions resulting from the notice. Announcements of contract awards (see FAR 5.303) or letters to the responding potential offerors may be used. The contracting officer shall send a letter to each responding potential offeror in all cases where the estimated contract value is $2,000,000 or greater.

{5315.406} Preparing requests for proposals (RFPs) and requests for quotations (RFQs).

{5315.4062} Part I The Schedule.
(a) Section A, Solicitation/contract form. Standard Form 33 or Standard Form 1447 shall be used as the prescribed form whenever a firm offer is solicited, regardless of the type of contract contemplated, except when it is contemplated that the procurement will be consummated by an order or modification to an existing contract. In such instances, a letter or message request for proposal may be used.

{5315.4065} Part IV Representations and instructions.
(b) Section L, Instructions, conditions, and notices to offerors or quoters. When applicable, include the following in this section:
(1) Cost or pricing data information when required by FAR 15.804 and 52.2152.
(2) When industrial security verification is required, a statement that the offeror must possess the highest degree of security clearance stated in the DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification.
(3) For major systems, specify the number of copies of proposals and major segments thereof that offerors must submit. The number of copies requested shall be limited to the minimum necessary for source selection. The contracting officer shall consider selective use of page limitations for management and technical proposals. Page limitations shall not be imposed for cost proposals.
(4) When the contracting officer decides that better cost realism and more accurate cost proposals would result from time-phasing the proposal submittals, a schedule that calls for submittal of the cost proposal 5 to 10 days after submittal of the technical/management proposal(s). In reaching this decision, the contracting officer should consider the complexity of the program/project and the source selection evaluation schedule.
(5) Source selection information, including the schedule of major source selection events included in the source selection plan as required by Appendix AA.

{5315.410} Amendment of solicitation before closing date. Confirm in writing any amendment to a written Request for Quotation, by letter, automated format, or teletype.

SUBPART 5315.5UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS

{5315.506-90} Air Force procedures.
(a) Each major command, FOA, and DRU shall establish contact points and procedures for receipt and disposition of unsolicited proposals received locally, consistent with the provisions of FAR Subpart 15.5.]
(b) The contact point for the receipt and disposition of all unsolicited proposals received at the Air Staff (HQ USAF) and Secretariat (SAF) is HQ AFMC/PKT, 4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6, Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5006, (513) 257-8934, DSN 787-8934, HQ AFMC/PKT will review the proposal contents and determine the proper activity within the Air Force to evaluate and process the

15-1
5315.604 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5315--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION
proposal. HQ AFMC/PKT shall acknowledge receipt of unsolicited proposals and forward each one to the processing activity in an expeditious manner.
(c) Unless otherwise directed by SAF/AQC, the cognizant contact point responsible for receipt and disposition of unsolicited proposals shall provide the Air Force's response to offerors.

SUBPART 5315.6SOURCE SELECTION

{5315.604} Reporting of source selection activity. Contracting offices shall submit quarterly reports projected source selection activity through the major command to SAF/AQCS. The report shall include each contract action during the next quarter where the instant contract value is expected to equal or exceed $100 million (including options). The report shall provide the following information for each action: the program name/project title; the estimated dollar value of the instant contract action(s), including options; whether formal or streamlined source selection procedures will be used; the source selection authority; and the source selection schedule. Reports are due by the 15th of the first month of the quarter (i.e., October, January, April, and July). Negative reports are required.

{5315.605} Evaluation factors.

{5315.605-90} Air Force procedures for Lowest Cost (Price) Technically Acceptable Selections.
(a) Under Lowest Cost (Price)-Technically Acceptable selection procedures, award is made to the offeror with the lowest evaluated cost (price) which meets all the minimum mandatory criteria. This technique does not permit trade offs between cost (price) and technical items/factors/subfactors. Therefore, this technique may only be used when minimum mandatory criteria and standards can be established for all essential technical items/factors/subfactors (i.e. by establishing "pass-fail" or "go-no go" thresholds of acceptability for each item/factor/subfactor.)
(b) When accomplishing a Lowest Cost (Price)-Technically Acceptable selection, the following procedures apply:
(1) Section M of the solicitation must state that award will be made to the lowest evaluated cost (price) offer that meets all the minimum mandatory criteria in the solicitation;
(2) The technical team must establish the evaluation standards prior to beginning evaluation of the offers. This evaluation plan should contain sufficient detail to justify a determination of minimum acceptability for each item/factor/subfactor;
(3) If it is necessary for the technical team to prepare Clarification Requests (CRs) and Deficiency Reports (DRs), a formal competitive range determination will be issued, discussions conducted with all offerors in the competitive range, as appropriate, and BAFOs requested;
(4) The technical team shall document the rationale evaluations in sufficient detail to explain each pass/fail decision; and
(5) The contracting officer will make the award decision and ensure all aspects of the award decision are properly documented.]

{5315.611} Best and final offers. (c)(i) Authority to approve requests for second or subsequent best and final offers (BAFO) for competitive negotiated acquisitions using formal source selection procedures is delegated to the HCA for all formal source selections except those for major, selected and other programs. This authority is not redelegable. The SSA shall forward requests for second or subsequent BAFOs on major, selected and other programs to SAF/AQCS for processing to SAF/AQ.
(ii) The staff office responsible for contracting in each major command, FOA and DRU shall forward an annual report to arrive at SAF/AQCS no later than 30 days after the close of the fiscal year. The report shall summarize the data collected under the reporting system required by DFARS 215.611(c)(ii) and any analyses and actions taken in accordance with DFARS 215.611(c)(iii).

{5315.612} Formal Source Selection. Air Force policy and procedures for conducting formal source selections are in Appendix AA, Formal Source Selection for Major Acquisitions, and Appendix BB, Streamlined Source Selection Procedures for Other Than Major Acquisitions.

SUBPART 5315.8PRICE NEGOTIATION
See AFAC 92-40, C1
{5315.804} Cost or pricing data.

{5315.8043} Exemptions from or waiver of submission of certified cost or pricing data.
(i) Waiver for exceptional cases.
(1) Except as delegated in (2) below, the authority to waive the requirement for cost or pricing data from prime contractors or subcontractors rests with the Assistant Secretary (Acquisition). Process waiver requests through command channels to SAF/AQCP.

15-2
AFAC 92-40 June 13, 1994 C-1

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

WASHINGTON DC

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY 10 JUN 1994

MEMORANDUM FOR ALMAJCOM-FOA-DRU (CONTRACTING)

FROM: SAF/AQC
1060 Air Force Pentagon
Washington DC 20330-1060

SUBJECT: Cost or Pricing Data

The attached memorandum from the Director, Defense Procurement (DDP) is forwarded for dissemination to all contracting personnel. The memorandum reiterates current policy but also clarifies that contractor information obtained to support cost realism analyses, referred to as cost documentation, is not cost or pricing data and certification should not be required. Accordingly, use of the Standard Form (SF) 1411 is not required when information is requested to support cost realism analyses. The amount of cost documentation requested, as well as its format, should be tailored to the individual contract action.

It is impossible to issue guidance that would cover every contracting situation. As we increase implementation of commercial practices, knowledge of the market and good business judgment will be key elements in successful acquisitions. In those situations where competition is expected or actually exists, automatic use of techniques and tools, such as the SF 1411, is not acceptable. Contracting officers must perform an assessment of each solicitation sufficient to ensure that contractors are required to submit only the documentation or data appropriate to the action.

/s/
IRA L. KEMP
Associate Deputy Assistant
Secretary (Contracting)
Attachment: Assistant Secretary (Acquisition)
DDP Memorandum, 28 Apr 94
AFAC 92-40 June 13, 1994 C-1.1

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

3000 DEFENSE PENTAGON
WASHINGTON DC 20301-3000

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
ACQUISITION AND TECHNOLOGY

DP/CPF APR 28 1994

MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTORS OF DEFENSE AGENCIES
DEPUTY FOR ACQUISITION POLICY, INTEGRITY, AND
ACCOUNTABILITY, ASN (RD&A)/API&A
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE
(CONTRACTING), SAF/AQC
DIRECTOR, PROCUREMENT POLICY, ASA(RD&A)/SARD-PP
DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ACQUISITION), DEFENSE LOGISTICS
AGENCY

SUBJECT: Cost or Pricing Data

One of the most frequently heard and long-standing complaints about the procurement process is that contracting officers ask for the submission and certification of cost or pricing data when such data are not required. This practice wastes government and contractor resources. Clearly, contracting officers must become more knowledgeable about and comfortable with alternative methods of establishing price reasonableness so that over-reliance on cost analysis techniques can be avoided. The purpose of this memorandum is to discourage contracting officers from obtaining cost or pricing data unless the data are clearly required or necessary.

Actions Under $500,000: Cost or pricing data generally should not be obtained for actions falling below $500,000. Contracting officers should instead use price analysis techniques to the maximum extent possible to determine price reasonableness. When the contracting officer cannot determine price reasonableness by using price analysis techniques, cost documentation may be obtained from an offeror in order to perform a cost analysis; however, the contracting officer shall request only that data which are necessary to determine a reasonable price. A contracting officer may require the submission of cost or pricing data for actions falling below $500,000 only if a written finding is made that such data are necessary for the evaluation of the reasonableness of contract price, and the finding is approved at a level above the contracting officer (see FAR 15.804-2(a)(3)).

Cost Realism Analysis: When cost or pricing data are not required because adequate price competition is expected, but cost determination is needed to determine the cost realism of competing offers, such documentation may be obtained. Cost documentation requirements should be tailored so that only necessary data are requested (see DFARS 215.805-70). Contracting officers should not require contractors to certify cost documentation, and cost or pricing data should not be requested.

Adequate Price Competition: Cost or pricing data should not be requested when adequate price competition is expected. Adequate price competition can exist even when price is a secondary factor in the evaluation of proposals as long as price is a substantial evaluation factor (see DFARS 215.804-3(b)(1)). Cost documentation may be obtained if necessary to ensure cost realism.

I ask that you devote special attention during solicitation reviews and performance management reviews to ensuring cost or pricing data requirements are imposed only when necessary. Please note that different requirements may apply when contracting for commercial items in accordance with the procedures set forth in DFARS Subpart 211.70.

/s/
Eleanor R. Spector
Director, Defense Procurement

AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5315.805-3(90)
PART 5315--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

(2) HCAs may waive the requirement for cost or pricing data for subcontracts with the forging industry that are less than $1 million. This authority may not be redelegated.

{5315.8046} Procedural requirements.
(e)(1) When an offeror refuses to submit cost or pricing data and the contracting officer and the commander of the local activity have exhausted all means available to them to secure the required data from the offeror, the case shall be referred to the MAJCOM director of contracting. The MAJCOM director of contracting shall take appropriate measures to obtain the data. If unsuccessful, a waiver package shall be submitted to SAF/AQCP.
(2) Requests for waiver to certified cost and pricing data shall include the following additional information (when a subcontractor has refused to provide cost or pricing data to a prime contractor, each item of the information required shall cover both the prime contract and subcontract):
(i) Contract type and number, RFP or purchase request order number, including supplemental agreement number;
(ii) A concise description of supplies or services being purchased;
(iii) Any outside influences or time pressures;
(iv) Complete company name and location;
(v) A complete description of the data (FAR 15.8042) the contractor or subcontractor refuses to submit and the basis for refusal (include all correspondence);
(vi) Names and titles of the contractor and/or subcontractor personnel contacted and the government personnel making the contact; and
(vii) A summary statement of the approval action being requested and the methods to be used to determine reasonableness of cost or price.

{5315.805} Proposal analysis.

{5315.8052} Price analysis.
(d)(l) When a contract action exceeding the small purchase limitation is negotiated based on a commercial catalog or a price list, the contracting officer shall obtain a copy of the operative portion of the catalog or price list before agreement on price. If this is impractical, the contracting officer shall request the list, at that time, and place it in the contract file when received.
(e) Base contracting activities shall require the activity that prepared the government estimate to review its accuracy and provide written review results before contract execution when the lowest acceptable cost proposal varies more than 20% from the government estimate for new negotiated contracts or contract modifications exceeding the small purchase limitation. The contracting officer shall place in the contract file a statement of actions taken to resolve differences between the cost proposed and the government estimate.

{5315.8053(90)} Cost analysis. Anticipated decrements, or decrement factors, are the historical differences between vendors' and subcontractors' proposed prices and the actual prices negotiated with those vendors and subcontractors, e.g., the historical average decrement for a specific vendor or the average decrement for a certain commodity or commodity group. When performing cost analysis on material costs based on quotes or estimates, the contracting officer should

(Continued page 15-3)

15-2.1

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5316--TYPES OF CONTRACTS

{PART 5316}TYPES OF CONTRACTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5316.2FIXEDPRICE CONTRACTS

Fixedprice contracts with economic price
adjustment.......................................5316.203 161
Description.......................................5316.2031 161
Application.......................................5316.2032 161
Contract clauses..................................5316.2034 161
Fixedprice contracts with prospective price
redetermination..................................5316.205 162
Limitations.......................................5316.2053 162
Firmfixedprice, levelofeffort term contracts..5316.207 162
Application.......................................5316.2072 162
Limitations.......................................5316.2073 162
Contract administration...........................5316.20790 162
Payment procedures and economic price
adjustments for fixedprice contracts
using the cost index method of EPA...............5316.290 162

SUBPART 5316.3--COST-REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS

Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts......................5316.306 16-3

SUBPART 5316.4INCENTIVE CONTRACTS

Fixedprice incentive contracts...................5316.403 163

SUBPART 5316.5--INDEFINITE-DELIVERY CONTRACTS

Decentralized Ordering............................5316.506-90 16-3

SUBPART 5316.6TIMEANDMATERIALS, LABORHOUR, AND LETTER CONTRACTS

Letter contracts..................................5316.603 163
Application.......................................5316.6032 163

SUBPART 5316.7AGREEMENTS

Basic ordering agreements.........................5316.703 163

SUBPART 5316.90 TASK ORDER CONTRACTING

Scope of subpart..................................5316.9000 16-4
Definitions.......................................5316.9001 16-4
Policies..........................................5316.9002 16-4
Procedures........................................5316.9003 16-4

16-i

Blank Page

AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-36 March 1, 1994 5316.703
PART 5316--TYPES OF CONTRACTS

(b) Firmfixedprice contracts. Normally within 30 days after actual index values required by the EPA clause become available, the contracting officer shall calculate the amount of the EPA, advise all interested parties, and initiate a supplemental agreement with the contractor to recognize the EPA, unless otherwise required by the EPA clause.

SUBPART 5316.3--COST-REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS

{5316.306} Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts.
(c)(2) The contracting officer is the "designee" for signing determinations and findings establishing the basis for application of the statutory price or fee limitation.

SUBPART 5316.4INCENTIVE CONTRACTS

{5316.403} Fixedprice incentive contracts.
(d) Billing prices. When actual cost performance data is not directly reported to the contracting officer and the administrative contracting officer (ACO) has sufficient knowledge of such data, the contracting officer shall, whenever possible, delegate to the ACO authority to negotiate downward adjustments in billing prices (See FAR 42.302(b)(6)). Contracting officers shall retain the authority to negotiate upward adjustments in billing prices.

SUBPART 5316.5--INDEFINITE-DELIVERY CONTRACTS

{5316.506-90} Decentralized ordering.
(a) For contracts that authorize decentralized ordering (i.e. ordering by a contracting officer with overall responsibility for the contract shall--
(1) Ensure that adequate control procedures are in place before any orders are authorized; and
(2) Exercise oversight of decentralized ordering throughout the period of performance under the contract to ensure that the procedures are followed.
(b) The control procedures shall ensure that ordering offices adhere to contract terms and conditions and prevent or identify any abuses, such as issuance of orders for items that are not covered in the basic contract. Control procedures should be tailored to the given circumstances. Generally, the control procedures should--
(1) Establish clearly defined line items;
(2) Place monetary limits on unpriced line items and other direct costs;
(3) Identify the contracting offices that are authorized to placed orders and establish an aggregate order ceiling for each; and
(4) Require all decentralized orders to be submitted to the contractor through the contracting officer with overall responsibility for the contract. As an alternative, the responsible contracting officer may exercise control by issuing control numbers to each authorized ordering office. Control numbers may be transmitted by telephone or in writing. But, the ordering office must be required to submit a duplicate copy of each executed order to the responsible contracting officer.
(c) In exercising oversight, the responsible contracting officer shall--
(1) Review and track all orders placed under the contract to ensure that all items ordered are covered by the basic contract and that monetary limitations for each order an ordering office aggregates are not exceeded. The contracting officer shall not rely on status reports furnished by the contractor as the sole means of tracking orders; and
(2) Conduct periodic management reviews to identify and correct any process or ordering deficiencies.

SUBPART 5316.6TIMEANDMATERIALS,
LABORHOUR, AND LETTER CONTRACTS

{5316.603} Letter contracts.

{5316.6032} Application.
(c) See 5317.74 for policy and procedures pertaining to undefinitized contractual actions.

SUBPART 5316.7AGREEMENTS

{5316.703} Basic ordering agreements.
(c) Limitations. (1) Basic ordering agreements (BOA) shall not be used for the acquisition of major systems, major modifications, or major operation and maintenance (O&M) programs. This prohibition does not apply to orders for the repair of battle or crash damaged aircraft.

16-3
5316.703 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5316--TYPES OF CONTRACTS

(2) To minimize the number of BOAs with an individual contractor, BOAs shall provide for the purchase of authorized supplies and services covering as wide a range as practicable. Separate BOAs may be negotiated when the pricing arrangement will be on other than a firmfixedprice basis, when it is necessary to restrict the use of the BOA to the acquisition of specific supplies or services, or when it is necessary to authorize the administrative contracting officer to issue orders.
(3) An activity having a requirement for a BOA is responsible for assuring that a BOA has not already been issued which will satisfy its requirement.
(d) Orders. Each BOA shall include a provision that requires the contractor to submit a price proposal for any unpriced orders, normally within 30 days after receipt of the order, but no later than 60 days after receipt. If the contracting officer determines that a longer period is necessary, the contract file shall be so documented. See 5317.74 concerning undefinitized contractual actions.

SUBPART 5316.9 TASK ORDER CONTRACTING

{5316.9000} Scope of subpart.
This subpart prescribes Air Force policies and procedures for use of task order contracts to acquire nonpersonal services.

{5316.9001} Definitions
"Task order contract," as used in this subpart, means any contract which provides for the issuance of task orders. A task order contract must include--
(a) A statement of work that reasonably describes the general scope, nature, complexity and purpose of the services being procured; and
(b) Terms and conditions that define the contract period (including any options to continue performance) and the maximum dollar values of the services that may be ordered under the contract and under any options.
"Task order," as used in this subpart, means the formal contractual direction for a contractor to accomplish specific tasks under task order contracts. A task order may only be issued by a contracting officer and must be in writing and specify distinct and severable tasks that are within the scope of the contract. Each task order contains the schedule, period of performance, acceptance criteria, and an estimated or firm price. The task order may either define the work to be performed or establish a required level of effort.
"Technical direction," as used in this subpart, means the advisory process by which the Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) provides clarification to a contractor for accomplishing work under a task order. Technical direction may be oral or in writing, but cannot, in itself, be contractually binding nor may it change the terms or conditions of the contract or a task order.

{5316.9002} Policies.

(a) A task order contract may be used when--
(1) All or a portion of the tasks to be performed under the contract cannot be fully defined before contract award; and
(2) A general statement of work can be prepared and the scope and duration of the effort adequately described so that potential offerors can submit responsive offers.
(b) Task order contracts shall not be used--
(1) To establish a contract type that is not described in FAR Part 16;
(2) To circumvent the requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) as implemented under FAR Part 6;
(3) As a substitute for fully defining and pricing contract requirements or options prior to contract award, when it is feasible to do so; or
(4) When the definition of tasks that may be performed is excessively broad or lacking specific minimum work requirements.
(c) Task order may not be used to increase the scope, period of performance or maximum dollar value of the basic contract. Such changes shall be made only by modifying the contract after obtaining appropriate justifications and approvals. Changes to individual task orders may be made by modification to the task order or by issuance of a new task order, as appropriate.

{5316.9003} Procedures.
(a) When preparing solicitations and contracts that provide for the issuance of task orders, the contracting officer shall--

16-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5316.9003

PART 5316--TYPES OF CONTRACTS

(1) Issue all requests for proposals and all requests for contractor estimates, conduct all discussions with the contractor, and issue any changes to solicitations or contracts;
(2) Include in the solicitation the criteria for evaluating costs, prices, rates and other factors directly relating to the offeror's ability to provide the services and level of quality;
(3) When two or more task order contracts will be awarded, specify in the solicitation and contracts procedures by which individual task order will be negotiated and either competed among or equitably allocated among the contractors.
(4) Include in Section H, Special Contract Requirements, a clause stating that performance cannot be authorized except by a task order issued by the contracting officer. The clause should also identify the officials (e.g. the COTRs) authorized to provide technical direction to the contractor and state that personnel providing technical direction do not have authority to direct a contractor in any manner which would change contract requirements; and
(5) Make notice of award as required by FAR 5.301 and announcement of contract award as required by AFFARS 5305.303-90(a) for initial award; however, notice and announcement of individual task orders is not required.
(b) When issuing individual task orders, the contracting officer shall--
(1) Issue each task order under a separate contract line item or subline item;
(2) Ensure all task orders and changes to a task order are within the scope of the contact with assistance of the local legal counsel and Competition Advocate.
(3) Before issuing a task order or a change to a task order that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, obtain coordination of the local Competition Advocate.
(4) Ensure each task order is written to avoid establishing a personal services relationship between contractor and Government personnel;
(5) In cost reimbursement task orders, establish in the task order or contract a maximum for that can be earned to avoid a cost-plus-percentage-of-cost arrangement;
(6) Obtain technical and cost analyses needed to establish the fairness and reasonableness of the cost or pricing (including, where appropriate, verification of the rates and factors used for pricing and billing); and
(7) Use the DD Form 1155, establishing a unique serial number and referencing the contract line item or subline item under which the order is being placed.
(c) During performance of a task order contract, the contracting officer shall--
(1) Establish procedures for users to request the issuance, award, or modification of a task order;
(2) Track the total of awards by Accounting Classification Reference Numbers (ACRN) and periodically review these to ensure the overall contract funding status or obligation/expenditure levels are appropriate for the contract; and
(3) Monitor contractor performance to ensure the required services (i.e. labor mix and type of effort) are being provided.

16-5

Blank Page

AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5319--SMALL BUSINESS AND SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS CONCERNS

{PART 5319}SMALL BUSINESS AND SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
CONCERNS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5319.2POLICIES

General policy....................................5319.201 191

SUBPART 5319.5SETASIDES FOR SMALL BUSINESS

General...........................................5319.501 191
Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering
Requirements (SABER).........................................5319.50190 191
Total set-asides for small disadvsntaged
business concerns...............................5319.502-2-70 19-2
Rejecting setaside recommendations...............5319.505 192

SUBPART 5319.8CONTRACTING WITH THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
(THE 8(a) PROGRAM)

Selecting acquisitions for the 8(a) program........5319.803 192
Agency evaluation of the Small Business
Administration's request for a commitment........5319.804 192
Contract negotiation...............................5319.808 19-2
Sole source........................................5319.808-1 19-2
SBA appeals........................................5319.810 192

19-i

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5319--SMALL BUSINESS AND SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS CONCERNS

SUBPART 5319.2POLICIES

{5319.201} General policy. (d) Major commands shall obtain the approval of the Director of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (SAF/SB) before appointing an Associate Director of Small Business (see DoD Directive 4205.1 and AFR 80042). Other commands shall consult with the Director (SAF/SB) before appointing a command Deputy for Small Business or any fulltime Deputy for Small Business. Appointments shall be made on Certificates of Appointment, available from SAF/SB. Appointments are effective when the appointing official signs and dates the certificate. Forward the certificate to SAF/SB for signature by the Director, after it is executed by the appointing official.
(d)(v) When Air Force participation is required in conferences conducted to assist small businesses, small business specialists will serve as the Air Force representatives. SAF/SB will assign responsibility for providing Air Force representation to commands with bases in the area of the particular conference. In the case of Congressionally sponsored federal procurement conferences, responsibility is assigned as follows:

HQ AFMC/ESC--New England except Fairfield County, Connecticut.

HQ AFMC/RL--New York north of Orange and Putnam Counties; Pennsylvania except Delaware, Montgomery, Bucks, Philadelphia, and Chester Counties.

11th Support Wing--Delaware; District of Columbia; Maryland; New York City; New Jersey; Virginia; FAirfield County, Connecticut; Montgomery, Bucks, Philadelphia, Delaware and Chester Counties in Pennsylvania.

HQ AFMC/WR-ALC--Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee except Shelby County.

HQ Space Command/ESMC, Patrick AFB--Florida east of Taylor and Madison Counties.

HQ AFMC/AFDTC--Alabama; Florida west of Dixie, Lafayette, Suwanee, and Hamilton Counties; Mississippi south of Issaquena, Sharkey, Yazoo, Madison, Leake, Neshoba and Kemper Counties.

HQ AFMC/SA-ALC--Louisiana; Texas east of Winkler, Ward, Reeves, and Jeff Davis Counties.

HQ AFMC/OC-ALC--Arkansas; Kansas; Nebraska; Oklahoma; Mississippi north of Warren, Hinds, Rankin, Scott, Newton and Lauderdale Counties; Missouri except St. Louis; Shelby County in Tennessee.

HQ AFMC/PL--Arizona; New Mexico; Texas west of Ector, Crane, Pecos and Brewster Counties.

HQ AFMC/OO-ALC--Colorado, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming and Utah.

HQ AFMC/SA-ALC--Oregon; Washington; California north of San Luis Obispo, Kern, and San Bernadino Counties; Nevada except Clark County.

HQ AFMC/SMC--California south of Monterey, Kings, Tulare, and Inyo Counties; Clark County in Nevada.

HQ AFMC--Illinois; Indiana; Iowa; Kentucky; Michigan; Minnesota; Ohio; West Virginia; Wisconsin, St. Louis County, Missouri.

HQ PACAF--Hawaii and Alaska.

In areas where AFMC has responsibility, the small business specialist or contracting personnel from other major commands represented in the local area shall attend. When the Air Force serves as DOD coordinator for the conference, the Air Force Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (SAF/SB) will be represented and will appoint a field coordinator from the directorate of small business in HQ AFMC. The AFMC representative will conduct a seminar on "How to Prepare a Bid" and prepare the DOD Conference Report.

SUBPART 5319.5SETASIDES FOR
SMALL BUSINESS

{5319.501} General. (c) The contracting officer shall document the review on DD Form 2579 (see DFARS 219.201(c)(9)(B)). The small business specialist shall review all acquisitions in excess of $25,000 for activities assigned a fulltime small business specialist.

{5319.50190} Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER). Except when use of small business setasides is suspended, the contracting officer shall consider every proposed acquisition for SABER, regardless of dollar value, as though the small business specialist had initiated a setaside request and procedures at 5319.505 apply. When small business setasides are suspended pur[-]

19-1
5319.501-90 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5319--SMALL BUSINESS AND SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS CONCERNS

suant to the Small Business Competitiveness Demonstration Program, the contracting officer shall follow the procedures under FAR Subpart 19.10 and DFARS Subpart 219.10.

{5319.502-2-70} Total set-asides for small disadvantaged business concerns.
(c) Requests for determinations will be prepared by the activity small business specialist and forwarded through the command Director of Small Business to SAF/SB. As part of the supporting information, provide--
(1) A detailed narrative that describes the negative impacts that have occurred on non-disadvantaged small businesses in each SIC code; and
(2) An estimate of the likelihood of future negative impacts.

{5319.505} Rejecting setaside recommendations. When notified by SBA that it has filed an appeal with the Secretary, the contracting officer shall prepare an appeal file. The file shall contain a statement by the contracting officer which sets forth the decision rationale and addresses the appeal issues on a pointbypoint basis. The statement shall include the rationale for disregarding known small business sources, small businesses identified through synopsis, and sources recommended by the small business specialist and SBA. In addition to the contracting officer's statement, the file shall include the comments and/or concurrence of the small business specialist, the completed DD Form 2579, SBA Form 70, any related correspondence, the procurement history, and a copy of the solicitation's coverage of evaluation and award factors. Forward the appeal file through command channels to arrive in SAF/SB within ten working days after receipt of the formal appeal.

SUBPART 5319.8CONTRACTING WITH THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
(THE 8(a) PROGRAM)

{5319.803} Selecting acquisitions for the 8(a) program. The small business specialist assigned to the individual contracting activity is the Air Force representative for purposes of this section.

{5319.804} Agency evaluation of the Small Business Administration's request for a commitment. The small business specialist assigned to the individual contracting activity is the Air Force representative for purposes of this section.

{5319.808} Contract negotiation.

{5319.808-1} Sole source.
Contracting officers shall send copies of any determinations to waive Miller Act requirements under DFARS 219.808-1 to the local Small and Disadvantaged Business Representative for forwarding through SADBU channels to SAF/SB.

{5319.810} SBA appeals. (b) Upon receipt of SBA notification of an intent to appeal pursuant to Section 8(a), the contracting activity shall forward both a copy of the notification and the contracting officer's decision through command channels to SAF/SB. SAF/SB shall notify the major command involved when a formal appeal has been filed with the Secretary and shall ask for an appeal file. The file shall contain a statement by the contracting officer which includes the chronology of events and addresses the appeal issues on a pointbypoint basis. Documentation fully supporting the statement shall be included as attachments or exhibits. The appeal file shall include comments of the small business specialist or concurrence as appropriate. Forward the appeal file through command channels to arrive in SAF/SB within ten working days after the contracting activity's receipt of the formal appeal.

19-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5322--APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

{PART 5322}APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUBPART 5322.1BASIC LABOR POLICIES

Title Paragraph Page

Labor relations...................................5322.101 221
General...........................................5322.1011 221
Overtime..........................................5322.103 221
Approvals.........................................5322.1034 221

SUBPART 5322.4labor standards for contracts involving construction

Administration and enforcement....................5322.406 221
Investigations....................................5322.4068-90 221

SUBPART 5322.10SERVICE CONTRACT ACT OF 1965, as Amended

Requests for status or expediting of response.....5322.10112 221
Substantial variance hearings.....................5322.1021-90 222
Cooperation with the Department of Labor..........5322.1024 22-2

SUBPART 5322.72RESTRICTIONS ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL FOR WORK
ON CONSTRUCTION/SERVICE CONTRACTS IN ALASKA AND HAWAII

Waivers...........................................5322.7002 222

22-i
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5322--APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

SUBPART 5322.1BASIC LABOR POLICIES

{5322.101} Labor relations.

{5322.1011} General.

(a)(90) In accordance with AFI 64-106, Air Force Industrial Labor Relations Activities, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (DAS)(Contracting) (SAF/AQC) approves, publishes, and implements all industrial labor relations policy. The Chief, Air Force Contractor Industrial Relations (AFMC CO/PKM), directs the day-to-day operations. AFI 64-106 identifies the regional labor advisors and their assigned geographical areas. The regional labor advisors--
(i) Advise SAF/AQC of any actions or activities that may impact SAF/AQC, contracting offices, or labor relations policies;
(ii) Coordinate on all industrial labor relations actions and Air Force responses;
(iii) Monitor and report the status of major collective bargaining agreements and labor management relations affecting significant Air Force programs; and
(iv) Guide and assist Air Force commands and installations on labor issues.
(a)(91) The contracting officer shall submit all reports and approvals required under FAR Part 22 and DFARS Part 222 through the appropriate regional labor advisor.

{5322.103} Overtime.

{5322.1034} Approvals.
(a) The following officials are designated, without power of redelegation, agency approving officials
(1) In AFMC.
(i) The Director and Deputy Director of Contracting, HQ AFMC;
(ii) The commanders, vice commanders and executive directors of AFMC Direct Reporting Units; and
(iii) The System Program Directors, the Senior Center Contracting Officials (SCCOs), and Buying Office Contracting Officials (BOCOs).
(2) In MAJCOMs other than AFMC, the commanders and vice commanders and the headquarters directors and deputy directors of contracting.

SUBPART 5322.4--LABOR STANDARDS FOR
CONTRACTS INVOLVING CONSTRUCTION

{5322.406} Administration and enforcement.

{5322.4068-90} Investigations.
(a) For construction contracts administered by the Air Force, the administering contracting office has the primary responsibility for conducting investigations. The contracting officer shall refer complaints or other evidence of possible labor standards violations to the regional labor advisor.
(b) When an investigation is necessary, the regional labor advisor will request assistance from the Department of Labor.
(1) If the Department of Labor is unable to conduct the investigation, the regional labor advisor will notify the contracting office that the Air Force is responsible for conducting the investigation.
(2) The chief of the contracting office will appoint an investigating officer to conduct the investigation in accordance with DFARS 222.406-8. The investigating officer will--
(i) Inform the regional labor advisor of the status of the investigation at least every two weeks; and
(ii) Forward the final report to the regional labor advisor for review and submission to the Department of Labor.
(c) When other than a detailed investigation is necessary, the regional labor advisor will recommend a course of action to the contracting office.

SUBPART 5322.10SERVICE CONTRACT
ACT OF 1965 (AS AMENDED)

{5322.10112} Requests for status or expediting of response.
If a requested determination, either individual or blanket, has not been received at least 30 days before the date needed, contact the appropriate regional labor advisor and provide pertinent information, (e.g., date of submission and SF98 number, number of contracts and types of services,

22-1
5322.1021-90 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5322--APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

and solicitation milestones). The regional advisor will seek to expedite the wage determination or Department of Labor authority to use the existing determination. The labor advisor will notify SAF/AQCO if it appears the new determination will not be
issuedin(sic) in time to include in the solicitation and authority to use the existing determination cannot be obtained.

{5322.1021-90} Substantial variance hearings.
(a) If a variance appears to exist, the contracting officer shall contact the regional labor advisor for assistance. If it is agreed that a request for a hearing should be made, the labor advisor will ask the contracting officer to compile information to support the case. The information shall include wages and fringe benefits paid by a reasonable number of both government contractors and private sector employers. Numbers of employees used by each company in each classification in question should be included. The regional labor advisor will review the supporting evidence and forward the request through channels to SAF/AQCO.
(b) Prevailing wage rate determinations (as opposed to those issued pursuant to a CBA) are not subject to a formal variance hearing procedure. If they appear to be excessive, data shall be referred to the regional labor advisor in the manner and with the evidence set forth above. The regional labor advisor and/or SAF/AQCO will contact with the Department of Labor to request reconsideration of the wage determination.

{5322.1024} Cooperation with the Department of Labor
(a) The contracting officer shall send any Department of Labor request for investigation to the regional labor advisor. The regional labor advisor will refer completed Department of Labor service contract investigations to the contracting officer. Depending on the circumstances, the contracting officer may need to--
(1) Collect employee wage underpayments.
(2) Recommend debarment;
(3) Assess Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA) liquidated damages; and
(4) Waive or reduce CWHSSA liquidated damages.
(b) The Chief, Contractor Industrial Relations and the regional advisors have the authority to--
(1) Reduce or waive the assessment of CWHSSA liquidated damages for amounts of $500 or less.
(2) Reject recommendations to reduce or waive CWHSSA liquidated damages regardless of amount; or
(3) Recommend to Department of Labor reduction or waiver of liquidated damages in excess of $500.

SUBPART 5322.70RESTRICTIONS ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
FOR WORK ON CONSTRUCTION /SERVICE CONTRACTS IN ALASKA AND HAWAII

{5322.7002} Waivers. The contracting officer shall submit a written request through command contracting channels to SAF/AQCO justifying why it is in national security interests to waive the requirement.

22-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5328--BONDS AND INSURANCE

{PART 5328}BONDS AND INSURANCE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5328.1BONDS

Performance and payment bonds for other
than construction contracts.....................5328.103 281
General...........................................5328.1031 281
Annual performance bonds..........................5328.104 281
Administration....................................5328.106 281
Furnishing information............................5328.1066 281
Review of bonds and notification of surety........5328.10690 281
Bid guarantees for supply contracts...............5328.190 281

SUBPART 5328.3INSURANCE

Risk pooling arrangements.........................5328.304 281
Overseas workers' compensation and war hazard
insurance.........................................5328.305 282
Insurance under costreimbursement contracts......5328.307 282
Group insurance plans.............................5328.3071 282
Liability.........................................5328.3072 282

28-i
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5328--BONDS AND INSURANCE

SUBPART 5328.1BONDS

{5328.103} Performance and payment bonds for other than construction contracts.

{5328.1031} General. Performance and payment bonds shall not be required in other than construction contracts unless there is a documented history of prior default by contractors in the particular type of work to be accomplished. Additionally, documentation of the inherent or recurring nature of such defaults, and the reasons therefore must be prepared before a determination to use such bonds can be made. In such cases, the determination to use bonds shall identify the protection sought from the bond which is not already provided by the Government Property, Protection of Government Buildings, Equipment and Vegetation, and the Service Contract Act clauses, or contractor's liability insurance. Additionally, such determination shall quantify the value of the protection afforded by the bonds and weigh this against the cost of bonding. The determination to use performance and payment bonds shall be made based upon careful consideration of the merits of each situation. The determination to require bonds in base level nonconstruction services contracts shall be approved by the chief or deputy chief of the base contracting office. Areas of consideration in establishing bonding requirements are as follows:
(1) Rates sureties/insurance companies charge for bonds are based on the full contract price, not a percentage thereof. Thus, when requiring bonds, the amount shall not be specified as a percentage of the contract price.
(2) Rates charged for a specific penal sum are considerably higher than rates charged based on contract price. Thus, unless the additional cost can be justified, a particular penal sum shall not be specified.
(3) Payment bonds are normally incorporated in performance bonds. Thus, separate payment bonds need not be requested.
(4) Added bonding coverage does not automatically occur when options to extend the period of performance are exercised. Thus, if bonds remain appropriate, the contracting officer shall verify the existence of the bond.
(5) Insurance companies executing bonds using a limited power of attorney shall submit evidence with the bond to show that the attorney, in fact, has complied with the limitation. These powers of attorney generally apply to bonds with a Small Business Administration (SBA) guarantee indemnification. The SBA Form 990, Guarantee Agreement, is acceptable evidence. Marking Block 41b of AF Form 3012, Contract Bonds Checklist, will indicate that the proper forms have been received and reviewed.

{5328.104} Annual performance bonds. All annual performance bonds for contracts other than construction contracts shall be submitted in duplicate to HQ AFMCLC/JAN for review, approval, and subsequent filing of the original with the original contract. Use Standard Form 35, Annual Performance Bond. Such bonds are not authorized without prior approval of HQ AFMCLC/JAN.

{5328.106} Administration.

{5328.1066} Furnishing information. (c) The contracting officer is designated to provide certified copies of payment bonds and contracts to the individuals described in FAR 28.1066(c).

{5328.10690} Review of bonds and notification of surety. All performance and payment bonds (except annual bonds, see 5328.104 and 5328.190) and all consents of surety shall be reviewed by the contracting officer using AF Form 3012, Contract Bonds Checklist. When doubt of legal sufficiency exists, obtain the advice of the staff judge advocate serving the facility. The contracting officer shall include a copy of all applicable bonds and consents of surety in the contract file.

{5328.190} Bid guarantees for supply contracts. All annual bid guarantees shall be submitted in duplicate to HQ AFMCLC/JAN for review, approval, and subsequent filing of the original with the original contract. When a contractor indicates in its bid that it has an annual bid bond on file, verification may be obtained from HQ AFMCLC/JAN.

SUBPART 5328.3INSURANCE

{5328.304} Risk pooling arrangements. Air Force contracting officers responsible for contract administration functions on contracts for which contract administration is retained by the Air force are designated as the point of contact for each arrangement.

28-1
5328.305 AFAC 92-31 August 1, 1993 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5328--BONDS AND INSURANCE

{5328.305} Overseas workers' compensation and war hazard insurance. (d) Requests for waivers shall be submitted through the HCA to the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting) (SAF/AQC).

{5328.307} Insurance under costreimbursement contracts.

{5328.3071} Group insurance plans. (a) Prior approval requirement. Group insurance plans under costreimbursement contracts for which contract administration is retained by the Air Force shall be submitted for approval to the Air Force contracting officer responsible for contract administration.

{5328.3072} Liability. (b) General Liability. The vast majority of contractors carry primary insurance on a comprehensive policy and supplement the primary limits of liability with umbrella liability coverage. Umbrella policies follow the form of the primary insurance and provide additional limits and coverage. The insurance marketplace requires varying amounts of primary liability to underlie their umbrella coverage and these amounts are frequently less than the $500,000 required by FAR 28.3072(b). FAR 28.3072(b) does not require only comprehensive form coverage. Contracting officers should accept umbrella policies in addition to comprehensive primary insurance, as evidence of FARrequired insurance coverage. For example, a contractor having $200,000 in general liability coverage and, in addition, $500,000 in umbrella form liability coverage should be considered in compliance with the $500,000 requirement of FAR 28.3072(b).

28-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5332.610
PART 5332--CONTRACT FINANCING

(e) SAF/FMPB shall evaluate the request within 30 days of receipt to determine if the advance payment pool agreement is justified. Assistance may be solicited from other sources such as contracting officers, auditors, disbursing officers and, if necessary, field visits to the institution. SAF/FMPB is responsible for
(1) Ensuring that the institution has adequate procedures and internal controls over cash disbursements;
(2) Validating cash flow projections;
(3) Determining amount to be authorized for advance payment pool limit, giving full consideration to reimbursement cycles and needed cash management procedures;
(4) Preparing Findings, Determinations, and Authorizations; and
(5) Preparing advance payment pool agreements. Recommendations shall be coordinated with SAF/AQ and SAF/GC.
(f) SAF/FMPB shall approve and forward the Findings, Determinations and Authorization for advance payments and the advance payment pool agreement to AFOSR/PK.
(g) Upon receipt of the signed D&F, AFOSR/PK shall take necessary actions to award the advance payment pool agreement and incorporate it into affected contracts. AFOSR/PK shall ensure that the clause at DFARS 252.2327000 Advance Payment Pool is included in each contract covered by the agreement.
(h) The contracting officer shall amend affected contracts, as appropriate, in order to incorporate the advance payment pool agreement.

{5332.47092} Administration of agreements. SAF/FMPB shall establish internal procedures for the accounting and internal control over advance payments made to institutions by the Air Force accounting and finance offices which perform duties of disbursing office. SAF/FMPB shall reevaluate advance payment pool limitations and recommend adjustments, when necessary, using the procedures in 5332.47091.

SUBPART 5332.5PROGRESS PAYMENTS BASED ON COSTS

{5332.501} General.

{5332.5012} Unusual progress payments. The contracting officer shall submit contractor requests for unusual progress payments to the MAJCOM. The MAJCOM Deputy Chief of Staff/Contracting shall recommend to SAF/AQ whether the request for unusual progress payments should be approved. All requests for unusual progress payments, whether recommended for approval or disapproval, shall be promptly forwarded to SAF/FMPB through SAF/AQCP together with all pertinent data supporting the recommended action.

{5332.5013} Contract price.
(a)(3) When provisional increases totaling $20 million or more have been made under a contract, the contracting officer shall notify SAF/FMPB.

{5332.502} Preaward matters.

{5332.5022} Contract finance office clearance. The procedures of 5332.5012 apply to FAR 32.5022(a) and (b). When seeking approval to provide progress payments to contractors of the type described in FAR 32.5022(c), the contracting officer shall submit the necessary information directly to SAF/FMPB.

SUBPART 5332.6CONTRACT DEBTS

{5332.610} Demand for payment of contract debt.
(a) Demands for payment of contract debts resulting from default termination shall require the debtor to make payment by--
(1) Check made payable to "Defense Finance and Accounting Service" and forwarded to Defense Finance and Accounting Service, DFAS-CO-FDP, P.O. Box 93031, Chicago, IL 60673-3031; or
(2) Electronic Funds Transfer to First Chicago National Bank, for credit to Account Number 1165186 in the name of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, P.O. Box 93031, Chicago, IL 60673-3031.
(b) When the contracting officer issues a demand for payment against a contract for which the payment office and cognizant accounting and finance office are different, the contracting officer shall provide a copy of the demand to both offices.
(c) Whenever a contracting officer renders a final decision that results in a contractor being contractually indebted to the Government, the contracting officer shall simultaneously issue a demand letter to the contractor (see FAR

32-3

5332.613 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5332--CONTRACT FINANCING

32.610(b)), with a copy to the appropriate finance office. The demand letter must be concurrently issued in all such cases, irrespective of any action taken or planned by the contractor to appeal the contracting officer's decision.

{5332.613} Deferment of collection. The recipient office shall forward requests for deferment of contract debts to the Director of Contracts at the major command headquarters who shall submit, on a priority basis, an evaluation of the contractor's proposal with the necessary reporting information and recommendation through command channels to SAF/AQCP for forwarding to the Air Force Contract Finance Office, SAF/FMPB.

{5332.670} Transfer of responsibility for debt collection.
Ascertaining and collecting delinquent contract debts is the responsibility of DFAS-CO-FDP. Debt cases shall be transferred to that office for collection to that office as prescribed by FAR Subpart 32.6.

SUBPART 5332.7CONTRACT FUNDING

{5332.790} Base contract funding.
(a) Base contracting activities shall not issue a solicitation for supplies or services without an allotment citation of funds availability unless the purchase request is for:
(1) A requirement chargeable to the Air Force Stock Fund and the local primary stock fund manager (of a stock fund division that is exempt from apportionment control) furnishes the following signed certificate to the contracting office:

"I certify that all purchase requests for ________________ stock fund items for FY _______ are provided for in the approved ______________ operating program for FY _____________. The proper accounting classification to be cited for the entire FY is _______________."

(2) An industrial fund requirement and the accounting agent has furnished an annual certificate substantially the same as in paragraph (1) above, except that the accounting agent shall enter the fund cite on each purchase request;
(3) A contract conditioned upon the availability of funds as authorized by FAR 32.7032;
(4) A requirements type contract is to be established which does not require a firm funded order at time of contract execution;
(5) Information needed for planning purposes pursuant to FAR 15.405.
(b) When a purchase request is for one of the following requirements, the base contracting activity may issue a solicitation, receive and open offers, and prepare final award documents (including contract clearance, if required). However, the contract shall not be signed by the contracting officer; delivered to the contractor; nor will the contractor be notified that it has been awarded a contract until funds have been certified by the accountable AFO. The clause at FAR 32.7032(a) shall not be used. If additive or deductive items are included in the bid schedule, the amount of available funds must be determined before bid opening.
(1) A project in connection with family housing and/or mobile home parks, upon direction by AF/CE;
(2) A construction requirement for the next FY, if the approving authority certifies that the requirement has a high enough priority to ensure that it will not be cancelled when the next FY funds become available. Current FY funds may be used if they become available before the end of the FY and the contract can be obligated as required by AFR 1708;
(3) A military construction program (MCP) project when the contracting office receives written notification that the Air Force has responsibility for the acquisition, that the project has been approved for acquisition and funds are available and being forwarded through channels. This exception still applies when the purchase request funding is limited to the amount of the initial Government estimate and the latest estimate, based on actual design and engineering information, exceeds the amount of the purchase request. In such cases, solicit bids or proposals before requesting additional funds; and
(4) A minor construction project (P341 funds and commissary surcharge funds) supported by a statement that funds are being held in reserve at HQ USAF and will be made available when needed to award the contract.

32-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15. 1995
PART 5335--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING

{PART 5335}RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

General...........................................5335.002 35-1
Air Force notification procedures.................5335.002-90 35-1
Publicizing requirements and expanding
research and development sources..................5335.004 351
Scientific and technical reports..................5335.010 351
Contract clause...................................5335.01090 351
Indemnification against unusually hazardous
risks.............................................5335.070 351
Indemnification under research and development contracts.........................................5355.0701-90 351

35-i
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5335--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING

PART 5335RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING

{5335.002} General.

{5335.002-90} Air Force notification procedures.
(a) Using organizational letterhead and standard letter format, submit the information specified in paragraph (b) below by FAX only to the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force/Legislative Liaison (SAF/LLP) at FAX number (703) 693-5589 or DSN 223-5589. After sending call SAF/LLP at (703) 693-7832 or DSN 223-7832, to confirm receipt. Do not mail the letter.
(b) The letter should be sent to SAF/LLP within 5 working days after the award date of the contract or modification, or the date the performance exceeds 10 years (see DFARS 235.002(1). Identify the subject of the letter as the "Ten Year R&D Notice." Include, the following information:
(1) The contract number;
(2) The contracting officer's name, office symbol and phone number;
(3) The program name;
(4) A brief description of the contract;
(5) The initial contract award date;
(6) The initial contract period of performance;
(7) The date of the contract action extending the period of performance beyond 10 years or the date performance has extended beyond 10 years from the initial award date and no notice has otherwise been provided;
(8) A brief explanation of the reasons for extending the contract beyond 10 years;
(9) A brief description of the work remaining to be done;
(10) The expected period of performance for the extension.

{5335.004} Publicizing requirements and expanding research and development sources.
(a)(2) Provide the SBA at least 15 workdays to respond to new requirements. If the 15day period elapses and no response has been received from SBA, the contracting officer shall proceed with the acquisition. Whenever practical, grant SBA procurement center representative (PCR) requests for additional time. If the request cannot be granted, the contracting officer shall provide to the PCR the reason the acquisition cannot be delayed.

{5335.010} Scientific and technical reports.

{5335.01090} Contract clause. To avoid duplication of effort and conserve scientific and technical resources, the contracting officer shall insert the clause at 5352.2359000, Scientific/Technical Information, in all study or analysis solicitations and contracts, including such contracts involving basic or applied research, exploratory or advanced development, and technology demonstrations.

{5335.070} Indemnification against unusually hazardous risks.

{5335.0701-90} Indemnification under research and development contracts.
Authority to approve requests for indemnification for unusually hazardous risks under 10 U.S.C. 2354 is delegated to the following officials, without power to redelegate--
(a) The Director and Vice Director of Special Projects (OSAF).
(b) The Director of Contracting and Deputy Director of Contracting, Headquarters, Air Force Materiel Command, HQ AFMC/PK; and
(c) The Senior Center Contracting Officials (SOCOs) for Aeronautical Systems Center, Electronic Systems Center and Space and Missile Center subject to any instructions issued by HQ AFMC/PK. All definitions of specific unusually hazardous risks must be improved(sic) by HQ AFMC/PK.

35-1

Blank Page

AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5336--CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

{PART 5336}CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTENGINEER CONTRACTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5336.2SPECIAL ASPECTS OF CONTRACTING FOR CONSTRUCTION

Specifications.....................................5336.202 361
Expediting construction contracts..................5336.270 361
Costplusfixedfee contracts......................5336.271 361
Material Approval Submittal Form (AF Form 3000)....5336.290 361
Contract progress schedules and reports for
construction contracts...........................5336.291 361
Major construction and renovation projects.........5336.292 362
Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering
Requirements (SABER).............................5336.293 36-2

SUBPART 5336.4SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR NEGOTIATION OF
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

Price negotiation..................................5336.402 362

SUBPART 5336.6ARCHITECTENGINEER SERVICES

Selection of firms for architectengineer
contracts..........................................5336.602 362
Selection criteria.................................5336.6021 362
Short selection processes for contracts not to
exceed the small purchase limitation...............5336.6025 362
Contracting with 8(a) or disadvantaged
architectengineer businesses......................5336.690 362
Use of the indefinite delivery, indefinite
quantity (IDIQ) contracttype for the
acquisition of architectengineering
(AE) services.....................................5336.691 362

36-i
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT January 1, 1992
PART 5336--CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

SUBPART 5336.2SPECIAL ASPECTS OF CONTRACTING FOR CONSTRUCTION

{5336.202} Specifications. AF Form 66, Schedule of Material Submittals, may be used by the contracting officer, civil engineer, and contractor to help material submittal requirements. The form is initially prepared by the civil engineer and submitted to the contracting officer with the purchase request. The contracting officer may include the form in the solicitation as an attachment. Upon award, the contracting officer, or designee, may provide copies to the contractor and the civil engineer at the preperformance conference. AF Form 66 may also be used to track the submission of periodic usage data for estimated quantity line items when the contract contains estimated quantity line items.

{5336.270} Expediting construction contracts. Requests to use expediting action shall be submitted through command channels to SAF/AQCO with information copy to HQ USAF/CE with detailed justification as to why such action is required.

{5336.271} Costplusfixedfee contracts. Requests for use of a costplusfixed fee (CPFF) type contract estimated to exceed $25,000 shall be submitted through command channels to SAF/AQCO with an information copy to HQ USAF/CE. The request shall include a complete justification for using a CPFF type contract.

{5336.290} Material Approval Submittal Form (AF Form 3000).
(a) Within 10 days after commencement of work or as otherwise established by the contracting officer, all materials and articles requiring approval, as contemplated by the Materials and Workmanship clause, shall be submitted by the contractor, by means of AF Form 3000. The contracting officer shall establish a suspense date on action to be taken on submittals and retain the fourth copy for necessary followup action.
(b) Insofar as practical and before commencement of work, the contracting officer shall inform the contractor of the materials or articles requiring approval.

{5336.291} Contract progress schedules and reports for construction contracts (OMB Approval Number 21R0129).
(a) AF Form 3064, Contract Progress Schedule, shall be used to satisfy the requirements of the Schedules for Construction Contracts clause (FAR 52.23615). Use of the form is optional in connection with requirements type contracts except that it shall be used to support each delivery order which establishes a continuous performance period of 60 days or more. Additional copies of the form may be used to provide for a performance period in excess of the time frame available on the form. Upon submission of the initial AF Form 3064, the contracting officer and civil engineer shall carefully evaluate the percentage of the total job assigned to each work element. Particular attention shall be devoted to those elements to be performed in the early stages of the effort to preclude overstatement that would result in an imbalance in payments and exceed the value of work performed. Work elements shall be limited to those tasks which will indicate the progress of the work and which may be readily identified and measured by personnel monitoring the contractor's progress. Normally the percentage factors of each work element should be related to the total value of the contract. This may vary, however, depending on the percentage factor the contracting officer chooses to assign for materials stored onsite. Consideration for materials stored onsite should be limited to major highcost items. It is not the policy of the Air Force to pay the contractor for miscellaneous low dollar value items prior to installation. Payment of materials stored offsite is generally discouraged, and is prohibited unless sound procedures are established for their accountability and control. Payments for materials in advance of installation will be substantiated with paid invoices.
(b) AF Form 3065, Contract Progress Report, shall be used to satisfy the requirement of periodic progress reporting by one of the following methods, at the discretion of the contracting officer:
(1) Separate reports covering the same period will be prepared by the contractors and by the civil engineers or their designees.
(2) The contractor shall prepare the report and route it through civil engineering. The civil engineers or their designees shall review the report and make necessary comments and forward it to the base contracting office for action.
Appropriate action shall be taken to resolve any significant variances of five percent or more in the percent of progress reported by the contractor and the civil engineer.
(c) Appropriate revisions shall be made to the existing AF Form 3064, or a revised form obtained, whenever a contract modification causes a change in the original progress schedule. A revised AF Form 3064 shall be obtained when-

36-1
5336.291 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5336--CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

ever the performance period is extended for 60 days or more. Upon completion of the contract, the actual completion date shall be entered on the AF Form 3064 and the form, together with all supporting copies of AF Form 3065, shall be filed in the contract folder as permanent records.
(d) Work elements entered in column B of the AF Form 3064 shall be limited to those tasks which will indicate the progress of the work under the contract, and which may be readily identified and measured by personnel monitoring the contractor's progress. Such elements as preparatory work, supervision, administration, mobilization, demobilization, and cleanup may be considered as appropriate entries when they represent actual progress upon which the contracting officer may make a decision regarding approval or disapproval of the contractor's payment estimates.

{5336.292} Major construction and renovation projects.
(a) For major construction and renovation, give extra care and attention to all aspects of the project to ensure its satisfactory accomplishment. It is particularly important to closely monitor the performance of the contractor at the outset of the contract. Early identification and resolution of problems will minimize the impact and cost of corrections or changes. Base and command level civil engineering and contracting staffs shall periodically review management of these projects.
(b) In contracts with numerous work elements, close management of each element by the contractor is necessary to ensure timely performance. When the clause at FAR 52.24612, "Inspection of Construction," is used for a family housing renovation project, a contractorprepared network analysis system or a critical path method surveillance technique should be required and used to supplement or replace the AF Form 3064 and 3065.

{5336.293} Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER).
Air Force policy, procedures and guidelines for implementing SABER programs are in Appendix DD, Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirementes Program (SABER).

SUBPART 5336.4SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR
NEGOTIATION OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

{5336.402} Price negotiation. When a cost estimate breakdown is required from the civil engineer and/or the prospective contractor for a negotiated construction contract or for any modification to a construction contract, AF Form 3052, Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown, shall be used.

SUBPART 5336.6ARCHITECTENGINEER SERVICES

{5336.602} Selection of firms for architectengineer contracts.

{5336.6021} Selection criteria. (a) Selection boards shall develop a point system to evaluate potential contractors.

{5336.6025} Short selection processes for contracts not to exceed the small purchase limitation. Either short selection process described in FAR 36.6025 may be used to select firms for contracts not expected to exceed the small purchase limitation.

{5336.690} Contracting with 8(a) or disadvantaged architectengineer businesses.
(a) When using Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act to acquire AE services, the Small Business Administration (SBA) shall be requested to provide at least three qualified 8(a) AE firms. If the SBA is unable to refer at least three qualified 8(a) firms, then the contracting officer shall ask the SBA to provide additional qualified AE firms that are disadvantaged businesses. A minimum number of three firms shall be available for evaluation by the selection board. The additional disadvantaged business firms referred need not be 8(a) certified to be considered for evaluation. However, before any contract award pursuant to this section, the firm selected must receive 8(a) certification. Therefore, when requesting additional firms, it is incumbent upon the contracting officer to alert the SBA that firms identified for evaluation must be eligible and agreeable to conditions required for 8(a) certification. Likewise, it is incumbent upon the SBA to expedite 8(a) certification processing to assure a timely contract award.
(b) The selection board shall evaluate the firms in accordance with FAR 36.6021. Upon completion of the evaluation and selection of firms, the contracting officer will notify the SBA of the firm selected for negotiation and, at the same time, shall ask for SBA's proposal. Negotiation of a fair market price and contract award will then be accomplished using Section 8(a) procedures.
(c) In the event three 8(a) or disadvantaged AE firms cannot be provided by the SBA for evaluation, the contracting officer will document the contract file accordingly, and revert to usual acquisition procedures for AE services. When reverting to the usual procedures, FAR and DFARS public announcement requirements apply (see FAR 5.2).

{5336.691} Use of the indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracttype for the acquisition of architectengineering (AE) services.

36-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5336.691
PART 5336--CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

(a) No individual order may exceed $299,000 in fees. An exception to this limitation is the initial order used to start the contract. This order may exceed $299,000 as long as properly indicated in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) announcement.
(b) The fees under a particular IDIQ contract may not exceed $750,000 for any year or option period.
(c) The selection procedures used to determine contract award of this type contract shall be those procedures for awards of contracts over $25,000. This means announcement in the CBD and a selection process using two formally constituted boards are required.
(d) As projects having design fees of $299,000 or less are identified, they are accomplished by issuance of a delivery/work order against the particular IDIQ contract.
(e) There is no prohibition against awarding consecutive contracts to the same firm.
(f) An IDIQ contract shall be awarded for a period not to exceed one year. An option for one year may be included.
(g) As this contract may cross fiscal years, funds for orders placed against the contract shall be obligated within the year appropriated.
(h) The announcement in the CBD shall clearly define the limitations of applicability as identified above.
(i) For environmental requirements when the services of registered architects or engineers are required in the performance of environmental projects involving prevention, compliance, and restoration, MAJCOM HCAs may set higher limits than those stated in (a), (b), and (d) above as follows;.
(1) The limit for the total individual contract amount shall be determined jointly by the MAJCOM contracting and civil engineering for HCA approval, with no delivery order size restriction, but the total of the AE award fees shall not exceed $200 million on any contract including the basic and option periods.
(2) Notwithstanding (f) above, when IDIQ contracts are used for environmental projects, the term of the contract may not exceed five years, including the basic and option years.

36-3

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5342.7101-91
PART 5342--CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

ters shall exhaust every reasonable means to obtain the refund or adjustment. If unsuccessful, the staff officer shall report to the HCA the action taken and recommend whether any further action should be taken. If further action is appropriate, the matter may be elevated to the MAJCOM commander, with the recommendation that the commander pursue the refund with the contractor's top management.

{5342.710191} Procedures applicable to spare parts.
(a) HQ AFMC/CC has the authority to solicit voluntary refunds pertaining to the acquisition of either initial or replenishment spare parts. This authority may be redelegated to the commanders of air logistics and product centers, without authority of redelegation. HQ AFMC shall establish procedures to ensure that proper action is taken regarding voluntary refunds pertaining to the acquisition of either initial or replenishment spare parts and for determining the amount to be sought.
(b) The staff officer responsible for contracting at the approval level headquarters, or higher authority, is responsible for determining what action should be taken to solicit a refund based on extra contractual consideration and for determining the amount to be sought.
(c) The contracting officer may also initiate an inhouse investigation to determine if such action should be taken. If investigation results indicate that a refund action is appropriate, the contracting officer shall:
(1) Submit a statement to the approval level headquarters including the following information
(i) The facts of the case;
(ii) Reason for seeking a price adjustment;
(iii) The proposed action to be taken;
(iv) A determination by legal counsel that no other remedy is available or appropriate and that solicitation or receipt of the refund will not jeopardize the rights of the Government; and,
(v) The results of any audits or other substantiating reviews.
(2) Consider obtaining a DCAA audit to substantiate the request, if the refund is significant and is based upon facts obtainable only through reviews of contractor records (i.e. costs incurred);
(3) Upon receipt of approval to solicit the refund, prepare a letter to the president or principal officer of the contractor which shall include the information required by 5342.710190(d), except that the letter shall indicate that the contracting officer is acting on behalf of the approving authority. Send an information copy to the HCA.
(d) If the refund action has been recommended by the GAO, the staff officer shall comply with the requirements of 5342.710190(e) and (f).
(e) The staff officer responsible for contracting at the approval level headquarters shall exhaust every reasonable means to obtain the refund or adjustment. If unable to secure the refund, the staff officer shall report to the approving authority the action taken and recommend whether any further action should be taken (which may include elevating the matter, through channels, to the commander of the major command, with the recommendation that the commander pursue the refund with the contractor's top management).

42-3

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5349--TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS

{PART 5349}TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5349.1GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Authorities and responsibilities..................5349.101 491
Processing Air Force terminations for
convenience......................................5349.10190 491
Settlement agreements.............................5349.109 492
Review of proposed settlements....................5349.111 492

SUBPART 5349.3ADDITIONAL PRINCIPLES FOR COST REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS
TERMINATED FOR CONVENIENCE

Adjustment of fee.................................5349.305 492
General...........................................5349.3051 492

SUBPART 5349.4TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT

Termination of fixedprice type contracts
for default......................................5349.402 493
Procedure for default.............................5349.4023 493
Repurchase against contractor's account...........5349.4026 495

SUBPART 5349.5CONTRACT TERMINATION CLAUSES

Special termination costs.........................5349.50170 495

SUBPART 5349.70SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Congressional notification on significant contract
terminations.....................................5349.7001 496
Air Force Procedures..............................5349.7001-90 49-6
Notification and reporting of substantial.........5349.7002 49-7

49-i

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5349.402-6
PART 5349--TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS

(1) Before initiating a default termination, the TCO shall
(i) Conduct a thorough review of the official contract file, the AF Form 3056, Termination Authority, and its attachments, and all other relevant documents. If the default is being recommended as a result of poor performance or defective workmanship, the TCO should, if practical, visit the site of the work to observe the existing conditions and to aid in the formation of an independent opinion. Pictures should be taken in appropriate cases to provide visual evidence in support of the TCO's decision to default;
(ii) Send the contractor a show cause notice if appropriate (see FAR 49.607);
(iii) If the facts support issuing a termination for default, prepare and forward the termination notice with the complete contract file to AFMCLC/JAB, if required, in accordance with 5333.211;
(iv) If the facts are insufficient to support a default termination, the TCO may negotiate a supplemental agreement with the contractor. If negotiation fails to provide a satisfactory solution, the TCO may terminate for default or for convenience, as appropriate, or in the alternative, take actions as outlined in FAR 49.4024; and
(v) If time and resources permit, the TCO should provide informal advice to aid the PCO in possible default cases.
(2) Additional responsibilities of the TCO. Upon receipt of AF Form 3056, the TCO shall
(i) Assume full cognizance over the contract and advise the contractor of the transfer of cognizance. After referral to the TCO, the initiator of the AF Form 3056 will not take any action pertaining to the contract without obtaining prior approval from the TCO;
(ii) Reestablish the delivery schedule, if it has been waived by the Government. Before reestablishing the delivery schedule, the TCO should consult with the initiator of the AF Form 3056 and with the ACO. The TCO may either retain cognizance over the contract until it is completed or terminated or else transfer cognizance back to the ACO;
(iii) Provide copies of each notice of default termination and of each assessment of excess costs to DFAS-CO-FDP, P.O. Box 93031, Chicago, IL 60673-3031 and AFMCLC/JAB; and
(iv) If the contract is terminated for default, request the PCO to furnish detailed information relating to reprocurement of similar supplies or services and the total amount of any excess costs incurred by the Government as a result of the contractor's default. Based upon this information received from the PCO, the TCO will prepare findings to base a demand on the defaulted contractor, its sureties and guarantors in accordance with FAR 32.610. If the paying office has retained funds due the defaulted contractor for work performed under the contract, the TCO will direct the paying office to apply these funds to amounts owed the Government and will issue a revised demand to reflect this application of funds.
(3) If the ASBCA sustains the contractor's appeal, and a motion for reconsideration is not made or is denied, the TCO will, upon receiving a copy of the ASBCA decision from AFCLC/JAB, issue a notice converting the termination to one for convenience. The TCO may either retain the case for settlement or forward it to the ACO. If transferring the case, the TCO will prepare and submit the DD Form 1594, Contract Completion Statement, to the PCO. If retaining the case, the TCO shall use termination for convenience procedures. The default docket file should be available to the TCO assigned to negotiate the settlement of the convenience termination.
(4) Default termination files will be closed when
(i) The decision of the ASBCA or court has become final;
(ii) Assessments have been paid by the contractor or have been determined uncollectible by DFAS-CO-FDP; or
(iii) When no assessment has been made and the time for the contractor to appeal has expired.
(5) Upon closing the termination file, the TCO will prepare the DD Form 1594, Contract Completion Statement, and send it to the PCO. The "Remarks" space of DD Form 1594 will contain the following statement:

"This contract was terminated for default of the contractor by notice dated....Items 6a and 6b above are not applicable. This termination file was closed on...."

{5349.4026} Repurchase against contractor's account. The contracting officer may not waive the defaulted contractor's liability for any additional costs to the Government

49-5
5349.402-6 AFAC 92-02 January 17, 1992 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5349--TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS

of the subsequent reprocurement of supplies or services. For a contract containing two or more line items, the defaulted contractor is liable only for the net cost increase to the Government considering all items which were reprocured. Unreasonable delay in reprocurement, reprocurement on the basis of a specification which is materially changed, or reprocurement prior to the issuance of the default notice to the contractor may release a contractor from liability for additional costs.

5349.5CONTRACT TERMINATION CLAUSES

{5349.50170} Special termination costs. Forward requests to include the clause at DFARS 252.2497000 to SAF/AQCS with sufficient justification to support a decision by the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition (ASAF(A)) (nondelegable). Secretarial approval is required for any increase in the Government's maximum liability under the clause. Include
(1) A detailed breakdown of applicable the cost categories in the clause at DFARS 252.2497000(a)(1)(5). Provide the reasons for the anticipated incurrence of each;
(2) Information on the financial and program need for the clause including an assessment of the contractor's financial position and the impact of a failure to receive authority to use the clause; and
(3) Clear evidence that only costs that arise directly from a termination would be compensated under the clause. Costs that would be incurred by the Government regardless of whether a termination occurs, shall not be covered by a special termination cost clause.

SUBPART 5349.70SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

{5349.7001} Congressional notification on significant contract terminations.

{5349.7001-90} Air Force Procedures.
(a) The term "Contract Price of Items Terminated (CPIT)," as used in this subpart means the contract price(s) of supplies or services not yet accepted (but being terminated) multiplied by the quantities or periods of performance being terminated. Do not adjust downward for progress or advance payments, accepted vouchered costs, or less than full funding. Use estimates when unpriced contract actions (UCAs) are being terminated, or when otherwise necessary.
(b) Contracting Officer procedures. These procedures apply to terminations for convenience and for default. The contracting officer shall submit the request for clearance by FAX to SAF/AQCP at least five working days before the proposed termination date, as follows--
(1) Use organizational letterhead and standard letter format. Mark the letter "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY." Address the letter to SAF/AQCP. The "SUBJECT" shall include "Contract Termination, 1412 Report." Send the FAX to SAF/AQCP, FAX number (703) 693-5589 or DSN 223-5589. A message may be sent if a FAX machine is not available. After sending, call SAF/AQCP at (703) 695-4982 or DSN 225-4982 to confirm receipt. SAF/AQCP will distribute copies to SAF/AQC, SAF/AQCS, SAF/LLP (Legislative Liaison), SAF/PAM (Public Affairs), and other appropriate offices (e.g. the Program Executive Officer (PEO) and Program Element Monitor (PEM)).
(2) In addition to the ten items in DFARS 249.7001(d), the letter shall provide:
"(11) the name, office symbol, and phone and fax numbers of the contracting officer; (12) name, office symbol, and phone number of the termination contracting officer; (13) name, office symbol, and phone number of the MAJCOM point of contact, if any; (14) name, office symbol, and phone number of the SAF or USAF PEM, if any; and (15) the planned termination date."
(3) The termination notice shall not be released until the contracting officer receives clearance by telephone from SAF/LLP indication the date and time Congress will be notified and the contractor should receive the termination notice. Normally this will be 1700 hours Washington, DC time. SAF/LLP will follow-up the verbal clearance with a FAX or by mail.
(c) SAF/AQC procedures. For systems and logistics contracts, SAF/AQCS and for operational contracts, SAF/AQCO will prepare and staff a package for SAF/AQ or SAF/AQC approval (based on SAF/AQC approval (based on SAF/AQC determination), as follows.
(1) The package will contain:
(i) Proposed notice to Congress (prepared with the assistance of the PEM),
(ii) Proposed press release and/or questions and answers, when appropriate (prepared by SAF/PAM), and
(iii) Necessary background information.
(2) SAF/AQCS or SAF/AQCO will coordinate the package through the SAF/AQ organizations (e.g. the PEO and

49-6
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5349.7002
PART 5349--TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS

PEM), SAF/GCQ, the Air Staff, SAF/LLP, and SAF/PAM, as appropriate. SAF/LLP will coordinate with CSAF and any other appropriate offices.
(3) The package will document approval of the notice to Congress (and any press release or questions and answers) and such approval(s) will authorize-
(i) SAF/LLP to release the notice;
(ii) SAF/PAM to release the press information; and
(iii) SAF/LLP to advise the contracting officer of the date and time to present the termination notice to the contractor.
(4) SAF/LLP will notify SAF/AQCP as soon as all coordinations and approvals are complete and the contracting officer has been cleared to proceed. SAF/LLP will also provide SAF/AQCP copies of the signed notice to Congress and clearance to the contracting officer.
(d) Congressional notification of the termination of classified programs will be through program channels.

{5349.7002} Notification and reporting of substantial impact on employment.
(b) The contracting officer shall forward the notification to SAF/AQCP, 1060 Air Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1060, immediately upon receipt from the contractor. SAF/AQCP will accomplish the appropriate notifications.

49-7

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995

PART 5351--USE OF GOVERNMENT SOURCES BY CONTRACTORS

{PART 5351}--USE OF GOVERNMENT SOURCES BY CONTRACTORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

SUBPART 5351.1--CONTRACTOR USE OF GOVERNMENT SUPPLY SOURCES

Authorization to use Government supply sources... 5351.101-90 51-1
Contract Clause.................................. 5351.107-90 51-1

51-i

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995

PART 5351--USE OF GOVERNMENT SOURCES BY CONTRACTORS

SUBPART 5351.1-CONTRACTOR USE OF GOVERNMENT SUPPLY SOURCES

{5351.101-90} Authorization to use Government supply sources.
(a) Contracting Officers may authorize contractors, who are performing Government fixed-price contracts for space systems, to acquire JAN Class S parts from the Defense Electronics Supply Center (DESC).
(1) If the pricing of the contract is not based on the lower DESC prices for the JAN Class S parts, contracting officers shall make a downward price adjustment to the contract price.
(b) This authority is provided by a class deviation authorized by the Director of Defense Procurement dated 8 JUL 94. This approval deviation is on file in SAF/AQCF.

{5351.107-90} Contract Clause.
The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 5352.251-9000. Use of Government Supply Source for Acquisition of JAN Class S Parts (Fixed Price).(sic) in fixed price solicitations and contracts for which the contractor is authorized to use the Defense Electronics Supply Center for acquisition of JAN Class S parts.

51-1

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5352--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

{PART 5352}--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUBPART 5352.2--TEXTS OF PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES

Title Paragraph Page

Notification of Government Security Activity......5352.204-9000 52-1
Visitor Group Security Agreements.................5352.204-9001 52-1
Elimination of use of Class I Ozone Depleting
Substances......................................5352.210-9000 52-1
See AFAC 92-26, E8
Safety and Accident Prevention....................5352.223-9000 52-2
Evidence of Shipment on Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Contracts.........................................5352.225-9000 52-2
Scientific/Technical Information (STINFO).........5352.235-9000 52-2
Control and Release of Inspectors General
Reports...........................................5352.237-9000 52-3
Use of Government Supply Source for
Acquisition of JAN Class S Parts.............. 5352.251-9000 52-3

52-i
E-8 April 9, 1993 AFAC 92-26

* * * * *

{5352.217-9000} Long Lead Limitation of Government Liability.

As Prescribed in 5317.9105, fill in the blanks and insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts:

Long Lead Limitation of Government Liability (April 1993)

(a) In performing this contract, the Contractor is not authorized to make expenditures or incur obligations exceeding dollars.
(b) The maximum amount for which the Government shall be liable if this contract is terminated (i.e. costs already incurred and those associated with termination) is dollars.
(c) The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing whenever there is reason to believe that, within the next sixty days, the costs expected to be incurred under this contract, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of the total amount allotted to the contract by the Government. The notice shall state the estimated amount of additional funds required to continue performance for the specified Schedule period, limited by the nottoexceed contract value.
(d) Sixty days before the end of the specified Schedule period, the Contractor shall give notice to the Contracting Officer of the estimated amount of additional funds required to continue long lead contract performance, when the funds will be needed, and any agreed to extension period specified in the Schedule.

(End of Clause)
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
PART 5352--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

SUBPART 5352.2--TEXTS OF PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES

{5352.204-9000} Notification of Government Security Activity.
As prescribed in 5304.491, insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts:

NOTIFICATION OF GOVERNMENT SECURITY
ACTIVITY (SEP 85)

Thirty days before the date Contractor operations will begin on base, the Contractor shall notify the security police activity shown in the distribution block of the DD Form 254, DOD Contract Security classification Specification, as to--
(a) The name, address, and telephone number of this contract company's representative and designated alternate in the U.S. or overseas area, as appropriate;
(b) The contract number and military contracting command;
(c) The highest classification category of defense information to which Contractor employees will have access;
(d) The Air Force installations in the U.S. (in overseas areas identify only the APO number(s)) where the contract work will be performed;
(e) The date Contractor operations will begin on base in the U.S. or in the overseas area;
(f) The estimated completion date of operations on base in the U.S. or in the overseas area; and
(g) Any changes to information previously provided under this clause. This requirement is in addition to visit request procedures contained in DoD 5220.22-M, Industrial Security Manual, paragraph 37d.

(End of Clause)

{5352.204-9001} Visitor Group Security Agreements.
As prescribed in 5304.491, insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts:

VISITOR GROUP SECURITY AGREEMENTS
(JAN 90)

Prior to beginning operations involving classified information on an installation identified on the DD Form 254 where the contractor is not required to have a facility security clearance, the contractor shall enter into a security agreement (or understanding) with the installation commander to ensure that its' security procedures are properly integrated with those of the installation. As a minimum, the agreement shall identify the security actions which will be performed
(a) By the installation for the contractor, such as providing storage and classified reproduction facilities, guard services, security forms, security inspections under DoD 5220.22-M, paragraph 5ag, classified mail services, security badges, visitor control and investigating security incidents; and
(b) Jointly by the contractor and the installation, such as packaging and addressing classified transmittals, security checks, internal security controls, and implementing emergency procedures to protect classified material.

(End of clause)

{5352.210-9000} Elimination of use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances.
As prescribed in 5310.9006, use the following clause in Section H of solicitations/contracts:

ELIMINATION OF USE OF CLASS I OZONE DEPLETING
SUBSTANCES (ODS) IN AIR FORCE PROCUREMENTS (OCT 94)

(a) It is Air Force policy to preserve mission readiness while minimizing dependency on Class I Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS), and their release into the environment, to help protect the Earth's stratospheric ozone layer.
(b) Unless a specific waiver has been approved, Air Force procurements:
(1) May not include any specifications, standard, drawing or other document that requires the use of a Class I ODS in the design, manufacture, test, operation, or maintenance of any system, subsystem, item, component or process; and
(2) May not include any specification, standard, drawing or other document that establishes a requirement that can only be met by use of a Class I ODS;

52-1
5352.210-9000 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5352--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

(c) For the purposes of AIr Force policy, the following are Class I ODS:
(1) Halons: 1011, 1202, 1211, 1301 and 2402
(2) Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs): CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-13, CFC-111, CFC-112, CFC-113, CFC-114, CFC-115, CFC-211, CFC-212, CFC-213, CFC-214, CFC-215, CFC-216, and CFC-217, and the blends R-500, R-501, R-502, and R-503.
(3) Other Controlled Substances: Carbon Tetrachloride, Methyl Chloroform, and Methyl Bromide.
(d) The Air Force has reviewed the requirements specified in this contract to reflect this policy. Where considered essential, specific approval has been obtained to require use of the following substances:

Substance Application/Use Quantity (lbs)

(List each Class I ODS, its applications or use and the approved quantities. If "None," so state)

(e) To assist the Air Force in implementing this policy, the offeror/contractor is encouraged, but not required, to notify the contracting officer if any Class I ODS not specifically listed above, is required in the performance of this contract.

(End of clause)

{5352.223-9000} Safety and Accident Prevention.
As prescribed in 5323.9002, insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts:

SAFETY AND ACCIDENT PREVENTION (APR 84)

(a) In performing work under this contract on a Government installation, the Contractor shall--
(1) Conform to the specific safety requirements established by this contract;
(2) Comply with the safety rules of the Government installation that concern related activities not directly addressed in this contract;
(3) Take all reasonable steps and precautions to prevent accidents and preserve the life and health of Contractor and Government personnel performing or in any way coming in contact with the performance of this contract; and
(4) Take such additional immediate precautions as the Contracting Officer may reasonably require for safety and accident prevention purposes.
(b) If this contract is performed on an Air Force installation, the Air Force Occupational Safety and Health Standards (AFOSH) developed in accordance with AFR 127-12, Air Force Occupational Safety, Fire Prevention, and Health Program in effect on the date of this contract, apply. If contract performance is on other than an Air Force installation, the Contractor shall comply with the safety rules of that Government installation, in effect on the date of this contract.
(c) The Contracting Officer may, by written order, direct additional AFOSH and safety and accident standards as may be required in the performance of this contract and any adjustments resulting from such direction will be in accordance with the Changes clause of this contract.
(d) Any violation of these safety rules and requirements, unless promptly corrected as directed by the Contracting Officer, shall be grounds for termination of this contract in accordance with the Default clause of this contract.

(End of clause)

{5352.225-9000} Evidence of Shipment on Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Contracts.

As prescribed at 5325.7390, insert the following clause:

EVIDENCE OF SHIPMENT ON FOREIGN MILITARY
SALES (FMS) CONTRACTS JAN 90)

The Contractor shall provide to the paying office evidence of shipment that will consist of both a DD Form 250, Material Inspection and Receiving Report, and the carrier's receipt (e.g. the Commercial Bill of Lading, the Government Bill of Lading, the United States Postal Parcel Service receipt, the United Parcel Service pick-up record, or other carrier pick-up document). The Contractor need not submit a DD Form 250, if one is not otherwise required under the contract.

(End of clause)

{5352.235-9000} Scientific/Technical Information (STINFO).
As prescribed in 5335.010-90 insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts:

52-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 5352.251-9000
PART 5352--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

SCIENTIFIC/TECHNICAL INFORMATION (STINFO)
(JAN 92)

If not already registered, the Contractor shall register for Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) service by contacting the following:

Defense Technical Information Center
ATTN: Registration Section (DTIC-BCS) BLDG. 5
Cameron Station, Alexandria, Virginia 22304-6145
(703) 274-6871

To avoid duplication of effort and conserve scientific and technical resources, the Contractor shall search existing sources in DTIC to determine the current state-of-the-art concepts, studies, etc.

(End of Clause)

{5352.237-9000} Control and Release of Inspectors General Reports.
As prescribed in 5337.110, insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts:

CONTROL AND RELEASE OF INSPECTORS
GENERAL REPORTS (JAN 1990)

The Contractor shall not release any part of an Air Force or Major Air Force Command Inspector General report without the Contracting Officer's written permission. The Contractor shall promptly forward any Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request related to an Air Force Inspector General report to the Contracting Officer for a release determination.

(End of clause)

{5352.251-9000 Use of Government Supply Source for Acquisition of JAN Class S Parts
In accordance with 5351.107-90, insert the following clause in Section I of solicitations and contracts.

USE OF GOVERNMENT SUPPLY SOURCE FOR
ACQUISITION OF JAN CLASS S PARTS (FIXED
PRICE) (JAN 94) (DEVIATION)

(a) Definition. "JAN Class S parts" as used in this clause are space-quality military standard electronic parts as described in MIL-S-19500 for semiconductors, MIL-M-38510 for microcircuits, and associated specifications for passive electronic parts.
(b) The contractor is authorized and encouraged to acquire JAN Class S parts in FSC 5961 and 5962 as defined on the enclosed list* from the Defense Electronics Supply Center (DESC) using Military Standard Requisitioning and Issue Procedures (MILSTRIP). If the parts are not available from DESC to meet contractual time requirements or if the contractor intends to acquire the parts from sources other than DESC, the Contractor shall advise the Parts Control Board of the alternate source.

*JAN Class S NSN List. This list will change from time to time. For most recent version, contact SMC/SDFP, 160 Skynet Street, Suite 2315, Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4863, telephone 310-363-2490.

(c) To use MILSTRIP, the contractor shall obtain a letter of authorization from the acquisition activity which includes the list of parts (including national stock numbers and order quantities) authorized to be ordered through MILSTRIP.
(d) JAN Class S parts obtained from DESC under this clause shall be considered Contractor Furnished Material (CFM), since the items are acquired directly by the contractor. The contractor shall retain responsibility for assuring timely delivery of parts to support this contract.
(e) DESC shall be responsible for reimbursing or replacing any defective part from the operating-stock, provided the defect was not caused by the contractor. Defective DESC parts shall be reported to DESC/QAR, Dayton, OH 45444-5000, telephone 513-296-5146.
(f) The contractor shall be responsible for rework, repair, retest, and schedule impacts of defective assemblies or systems caused by parts failures, including those caused by JAN Class S parts acquired from DESC, in the same manner as if the defective material has been acquired from sources other than DESC. The Government's liability for parts failure shall not exceed the cost of the JAN Class S part and this limitation of liability shall apply in lieu of any other liability provision of this contract.
(g) The contractor shall follow AFM 67-1, Volume 1, MILSTRIP Requisitioning Procedures, as specified by the acquisition activity.
(h) The contractor agrees to include a clause substantially the same as this clause, including this paragraph (h), in every subcontract or purchase order issued in performance of this contract, unless it is known that the item purchased does not contain any electronic parts identified in paragraph (b) above.
(i) The contractor shall pay bills from DESC promptly

52.3
5352.251-9000 AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
PART 5352--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

upon receipt of billings.
(j) The contractor agrees that JAN Class S parts acquired under this clause shall only be used in the performance of this Government contract.

(End of clause)

52-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92--33 November 1, 1993
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS
contract.
x. Weakness. An aspect of or omission from an offeror's proposal that contributes to a deficiency in meeting an evaluation standard or is otherwise a shortcoming of the proposal that has the potential to degrade contract performance.

{AA-104} Policies. The following policies apply:
a. It is Air Force policy to provide for full and open competition, or when full and open competition is not possible (see FAR Part 6), to obtain competition to the maximum extent practicable.
b. The SSA shall be presented with sufficient in-depth information on each of the competing offerors and their proposals to permit an objective selection decision.
c. The SSAC will be staffed with senior government personnel possessing broad experience in specific fields, such as systems development, systems engineering, manufacturing, operational requirements, finance, logistics, law and contracting. For major programs, the chairperson and the SSAC member from each Air Force organization represented should be a general officer or a member of the Senior Executive Service. The primary SSAC members, who represent HQ USAF and the Secretariat, shall be afforded an opportunity to advise the SSAC Chairperson or SSA before key formal source selection events and decisions. To accomplish this, the SSAC chairperson shall convene the SSAC and allow that body to review drafts of briefings and supporting background material. These key events include briefing the initial evaluation results, competitive range determinations, and final evaluation results.
d. Only fully qualified personnel possessing the professional skills and knowledge required for an objective evaluation and assessment of offeror's proposals shall be selected to participate on the SSEB. The Program Manager is usually designated the SSEB chairperson.
e. Early industry involvement including the use of draft RFPs is recommended to obtain industry comments. The contracting officer may request industry feedback on contract type, performance, schedule, Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs), specifications, statements of work, and other requirements that impact costs or restrict technical solutions. Equal access for all potential offerors must be afforded and a cut-off date will be established for receipt of comments to permit government evaluation and incorporation of accepted changes into the formal solicitation. The Program Office shall evaluate recommendations, make appropriate changes and provide industry feedback on disposition of the recommendations.
f. The rating system used in evaluating and analyzing proposals shall be described in the SSP. The rating system shall be structured to evaluate the offeror's proposal to meet the requirement as well as the strengths, weaknesses and risks associated with each proposal. The rating system must at a minimum include written narratives at the factor level and subfactor level and descriptive color coding at the factor level. (See paragraph AA-304.) The objective of the rating system is to display an assessment of all important aspects of the offeror's proposal.
g. Except where award without discussions is planned in accordance with FAR 15.610, it is Air Force policy to conduct written or oral discussions with all offerors in the competitive range. These discussions should lead to submission of BAFOs, which will culminate in signed contractual documents representing the firm commitment of each such offeror.
h. The use of auctioning techniques, such as indicating to an offeror a price which must be met to obtain further consideration, or informing an offeror that its price is not low in relation to that of another offeror, are strictly prohibited. This prohibition does not preclude discussing price or cost elements that are not clear or appear to be unreasonable or unjustified. Discussions may encourage offerors to put forward their most favorable price proposals. However, the price elements of any other offeror must not be discussed, disclosed, or compared. Technical leveling and technical transfusion through discussions with offerors are also strictly prohibited.
i. The request for BAFO must not be used as either an auctioning technique or to pressure offerors to lower prices. All changes in price at BAFO must be fully substantiated by offerors. The common cutoff date for conclusion of discussions and requests for a BAFO must be scheduled to ensure that all competitors have an equal opportunity for discussion.
j. The cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and Defense Contract Management Command (DCMC) personnel should be invited to take part, as appropriate, in reviewing the solicitation and assisting in contract negotiation.

{AA-105} Source Selection Authority (SSA).
a. Unless otherwise directed by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the Air Force, ASAF(A) is the SSA for those contract actions where the application of this appendix is mandatory under paragraph AA-101a.

AA-5
AFAC 92--44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT

APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS
Additionally, the ASAF(A) may serve as SSA for any other acquisition deemed appropriate.
b. The ASAF(A) will normally retain SSA for Major, Selected, and Other Program contract actions meeting the thresholds under paragraph AA-101a(1), (2) and (3). The authority for selecting a source for individual contract actions falling below the thresholds established under paragraph AA-101a(1), (2) and (3) is delegated by ASAF(A) to the applicable Program Executive Officer (PEO) or Designated Acquisition Commander (DAC) with the authority to redelegate. Redelegation can be made on either a case-by-case basis or by blanket delegation and shall be in writing. It is Air Force policy to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest on all source selections. In support of this policy, the PEO/DAC, in consultation with the AFMC Commander or Vice Commander, shall select a suitable neutral party as SSA when the "normal" SSA would create the appearance of a conflict. For example, if an Air Logistics Center (ALC) is competing as part of a Depot Maintenance Competition, AFMC/CC or the PEO/DAC may, in accordance with MAJCOM procedures, select an alternate as SSA instead of the Commander of the ALC involved in the competition.
c. For Communications and Computer acquisitions designated as Selected Programs, SSA is delegated to the PEO unless otherwise directed by the ASAF(A). For those Communications and Computer acquisitions designated as a MAIS or with an estimated value of $100 million or more and not assigned to a PEO, ASAF(A) has delegated SSA to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition & Management) (PDASAF(A&M)), with the authority to redelegate.
d. The ASAF(A) will normally retain SSA for Other Contracting contract actions meeting the thresholds under paragraph AA-101a(5). The authority for selecting a source for individual contract actions falling below the thresholds established under paragraph AA-101a(5) is delegated to Major Command Commanders with the authority to redelegate. Redelegation can be made on either a case-by-case basis or by blanket delegation and shall be in writing.
e. When the ASAF(A) authority has been delegated on Major, Selected, or Other Programs or Communications and Computer acquisitions assigned to a PEO or DAC, the SSA will inform ASAF(A) of significant events in the source selection. For all source selections meeting the thresholds of this appendix, the SSA will personally notify ASAF(A) before the announcement of the award, unless other instructions are provided.

{AA-106} Organization. Formal source selection contemplates creation of a separate source selection organization and management chain of command (SSA, SSAC, and SSEB) for each acquisition. The organization must be structured to ensure continuity, and to provide for active ongoing involvement of appropriate contracting, technical, logistics, legal, cost, and other functional staff management expertise. The PRAG (if used) normally reports directly to the SSA or SSAC. See Attachment 1 for diagrams of typical source selection organizations. The source selection organization must be consistent with the organization described in the SSP.

{AA-107} Responsibilities and Duties. A successful source selection requires teamwork. Members of the SSAC and SSEB from all disciplines must work together to ensure that the SSA is presented an accurate integrated assessment of each offeror's proposal. Each member shall be given access to the full range of evaluation tools available, including the advice of personnel in other disciplines who serve as source selection advisors. The listing of key responsibilities and duties below are not in chronological order. Their sequence can vary widely depending upon the circumstances surrounding a given acquisition.
a. The SSA is responsible for the proper and efficient conduct of the entire source selection process encompassing proposal solicitation, evaluation, selection and contract award. The SSA has, subject to law and applicable regulations, full responsibility and authority to select source(s) for award and approve the execution of contracts. The SSA shall:
(1) Review and approve in writing the SSP including any special instructions or guidance regarding solicitation provisions, contract clauses and objectives;
(2) Appoint the SSAC Chairperson, Secretariat and HQ USAF members of the SSAC and advisors to the SSA or SSAC;
(3) Provide the SSAC and SSEB with guidance and instructions for conducting the source selection;
(4) Caution all involved in the source selection of the consequences of unauthorized disclosure of source selection information;
(5) Approve the Contracting Officer's competitive range determination. This approval may be delegated to the SSAC chairperson (without further delegation) except that authority to exclude any offeror from the competitive range (at any time during the source selection process) is not delegable;

AA-6
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92--33 November 1, 1993
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS
egations, SSAC Chairperson nominations, and SSPs;
(2) Coordinate scheduling of Source Selection meetings and control access to briefings chaired by ASAF(A); and
(3) Manage the coordination and approval of all Source Selection documents and facilitate resolution of contractual issues, to ensure timely processing and approval within the Secretariat.

{AA-108} Advisors.
(a) Government and non-government experts may be called upon to provide advisory assistance to the SSA, SSAC, or SSEB. Advisors may objectively review a proposal in a particular functional area and provide comments and recommendations to the governmentns decision makers. They may not determine strengths and weaknesses, establish initial or final assessments of risks, or actually rate or rank offeror's proposals.
(b) The following additional restrictions are placed on nongovernment advisors. Non-government advisors shall not be:
(1) Provided offeror proprietary, confidential or privileged commercial or financial data unless prior written consent is obtained from the offeror;
(2) Allowed to participate in oral presentations or discussions, unless requested by the SSA or SSAC chairperson; and
(3) Allowed to participate in government decision making meetings, such as SSAC sessions or briefings, unless the SSA or SSAC chairperson requests that they be present during a particular portion of the meeting when they may be called upon to provide technical expertise.
(c) When non-government advisors are used, the solicitation must include a provision advising offerors that non-government contractor employees will have access to proposals (see FAR 15.413-2(f)). A provision may be included in the solicitation identifying the nongovernment advisors and their employees and advising that any objection to disclosure:
(1) Should be provided in writing prior to the date set for receipt of proposals; and
(2) Shall include a detailed statement of the basis for the objection.
(d) An organizational conflict of interest (OCI) clause covering nondisclosure of contractor data shall be included in contracts where the contractor is to participate as a non-government advisor to a source selection (see FAR 9.5).

{AA-109} Conflicts of Interest. All persons involved in the source selection process (including non-Air Force personnel) will be instructed to inform the SSA if their participation in source selection activities might result in a real, apparent, possible, or potential conflict of interest. When so advised, the SSA will disqualify any person whose participation in the source selection process could raise questions regarding real, apparent, possible, or potential conflicts of interest.

{AA-110} Solicitation and Contract Documents. The Program Office will provide, upon request and in a timely manner, copies of the solicitation or other source selection documents to SAF/AQC.

{AA-111} Plant Visits. Plant visits by the SSAC and SSEB may be beneficial during the source selection process. Plant visits by source selection personnel must be for a specific, clearly stated purpose, and be approved by the SSAC chairperson. The SSAC chairperson should ensure that all visits are made on an impartial basis (see FAR Subpart 42.4, regarding correspondence with contractors and visits to contractor facilities). Some examples of potentially beneficial plant visits are:
a. Presolicitation visits, as a preliminary step to the identification of prospective sources;
b. Key SSEB members' visits during the evaluation phase to develop knowledge for judging the potential for correction of deficiencies;
c. SSAC visits immediately before assembling all facts pertaining to the selection of the prospective contractor(s);
d. Manufacturing Methods/Production Capability Reviews and Production Readiness Reviews required to accurately define the contractor's proposed method of manufacture and capability to manufacture; and
e. Software Development Capability Assessment (SDCA). For programs where software development is critical, it may be appropriate to conduct an SDCA and associated plant visits.

{AA-112} Interface With Contractors. All personnel must be cautioned that only the Contracting Officer may commit the U.S. Government. Personnel involved in the source

AA-9
AFAC 92--44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS
selection must avoid any situation or contact with any competing offeror that is not essential, or would raise questions of impropriety. The objectivity of the source selection process may be impaired by contacts between government personnel and prime/subcontractors involved in the competition during the period between the release of the solicitation and announcement of the source selection decision. Contacts with prospective contractors regarding the specific source selection must be avoided, except for personnel directly participating in source selection discussions and contract negotiations.

{AA-113} Foreign Military Sales. When the Air Force conducts a major source selection for a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customer or in accordance with a cooperative agreement with a foreign government, the procedures of this appendix will be followed unless a deviation is approved in accordance with paragraph AA-114.
a. The FMS customer shall not participate in the formal source selection process. Subject to approval by the SSA, representatives of the customer country may be called upon by the SSEB or SSAC to clarify technical or management questions arising during evaluation of contractor proposals. The cost data or any part of a contractor's cost proposal shall not be released to any representative of the FMS customer. Representatives of the FMS customer shall not participate in contract negotiations.
b. Source selection decisions in international cooperative projects are the responsibility of the host nation in accordance with the terms of the cooperative agreement. When the Air Force represents the United States as host nation, this appendix should be followed. In accordance with the terms of the specific cooperative agreement, all participating nations may be represented on the SSEB and SSAC, but the SSA shall, after considering the advice of the SSEB and SSAC, make the source selection decision.

{AA-114} Deviations. Deviations to this appendix may be granted only by the ASAF(A) or PDASAF(A&M), unless this appendix is used at the discretion of the SSA (see paragraph AA-101a, Note 3), in which case the SSA may approve deviations.
a. When the SSA is the ASAF(A) or PDASAF(A&M), a request for deviation may be included in the SSP and must specifically identify the deviation with adequate rationale.
b. Other requests for deviations shall be submitted in writing through appropriate channels to SAF/AQCS.

{AA-115} Regulatory References. A list of key regulatory references pertaining to formal source selection is provided in Attachment 2.

AA-10
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92--44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Part 2 - PRE-EVALUATION ACTIVITIES

{AA-201} Introduction. This part explains the major steps in the source selection process that occur before receipt of initial proposals.

{AA-202} Acquisition Strategy.
a. An Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP) shall be held for all acquisitions subject to this appendix.
b. Secretariat and HQ USAF representatives listed in Attachment 3 shall be invited to participate. Invitations should be received normally at least two weeks in advance of the scheduled ASP. SAF/AQCS shall also be advised of the time and place of these ASPs.

{AA-203} Delegation or Retention of Source Selection Authority.
a. Delegation of source selection authority shall be an agenda item at the ASP. The discussions regarding delegation should be reflected in the minutes of the ASP.
b. If delegation of source selection authority is requested, the request shall be sent to the ASAF(A) or the PDASAF(A&M), as appropriate, through SAF/AQCS. The request shall be accompanied by the ASP briefing charts and minutes. The request should concisely identify the acquisition, request delegation and identify tentative SSAC meeting dates for solicitation release authorization, initial proposal evaluation review, competitive range determination, and final decision briefing.
(1) If the delegation request is approved, the ASAF(A) or PDASAF(A&M) shall sign and forward the delegation decision memorandum to the PEO, DAC, or appropriate Commander identifying individuals who will serve on the SSAC and identifying the SAF/AQCS action officer.
(2) If the delegation request is not approved and selection authority is retained within the Secretariat, SAF/AQC shall ask the PEO, DAC or appropriate commander to nominate an SSAC chairperson. The ASAF(A) reply memorandum will identify the SSA, appoint the SSAC chairperson, and identify Secretariat and HQ USAF individuals selected for SSAC membership and the SAF/AQCS action officer. The program office shall forward a draft SSP through the SSAC chairperson to SAF/AQCS. SAF/AQCS will coordinate the SSP with primary SSAC members within the Secretariat and HQ USAF before forwarding it to the SSA.
c. If a PEO, DAC, or MAJCOM/CC believes that ASAF(A) should retain source selection authority for an acquisition normally delegated in accordance with paragraph AA-105, the PEO, DAC or MAJCOM/CC shall forward a memorandum to ASAF(A) through SAF/AQCS with the ASP briefing charts and minutes. The memorandum will: (1) justify recommending ASAF(A) retention; (2) nominate a proposed SSAC chairperson; (3) include a proposed source selection schedule; and (4) request identification of Secretariat and HQ USAF SSAC members. The memorandum should be sent as soon as possible after the ASP. The ASAF(A) will document the retention or delegation decision in a Decision Memorandum. If source selection authority is retained by the ASAF(A), ASAF(A) will appoint the SSAC chairperson and forward the SSP to SAF/AQCS for coordination of Secretariat and HQ USAF SSAC members prior to approval by the SSA.

{AA-204} Basis of Award, Evaluation Criteria and General Considerations.
a. The basis for source selection and award of a contract must be limited to criteria or considerations that are set forth in the solicitation. Therefore, it is mandatory that the RFP clearly state all characteristics of the requirement that will be considered by the Air Force in making the source selection. Air Force source selection awards are based on an integrated assessment of each offerorns cost (price) criterion, specific criteria, assessment criteria, proposal risk, performance risk, and general considerations. These criteria are set forth in a structured manner in Section M of the RFP. This section serves as the "rules of engagement" for the source selection.
b. Evaluation criteria should be tailored to the characteristics of a particular program and should include only those significant aspects expected to have an impact on the ultimate selection decision. Evaluation criteria consist of three types: cost (price) criterion, specific criteria, and assessment criteria. The cost (price) criterion relates to the evaluation of the offeror's proposed costs (price). The specific criteria relate to program characteristics, such as reliability, availability, maintainability, transportability, and environmental considerations. The assessment criteria serve as a basis for evaluating each offeror's proposal as it relates to the specific criteria. See Attachment 5 for an example of the general format of the evaluation matrix.
(1) Cost (price) is a mandatory evaluation criterion that shall be evaluated as a factor in every AFFARS Appendix AA source selection to determine realism, completeness and reasonableness. Examples of this factor might be instant contract cost (price), or life cycle cost. Evaluation results are summarized without use of color coding and without incorporating individual offeror cost performance risk.
(2) Specific criteria relate to program characteristics.
AA-11
AFAC 92--44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS
The specific criteria are typically divided into technical and/or management evaluation areas. Examples of specific criteria might include areas, such as, technical, supportability, manufacturing, operational utility, design approach, readiness and support, test and management. These areas are further subdivided into factors, subfactors and in some instances, elements. The level of subdivision depends on the complexity of the area being evaluated. Factors should be related to characteristics which are important to program success, such as, reliability and maintainability, system effectiveness, producibility, supportability, and data management (including the Contract Data Requirements List). The SSP and Section M will state the level at which color/adjectival ratings will be assigned.
(3) Assessment criteria form the basis for evaluating each offeror's proposal in regards to the relevant evaluation criteria. Evaluators use assessment criteria in conjunction with evaluation standards to judge how well an offeror's proposal satisfies each of the relevant evaluation criteria.
c. General considerations relate to proposed contractual terms and conditions, results of preaward surveys, past performance (if performance risk methodology is not used), and other surveys or reviews.
d. Proposal risks are assessments associated with cost, schedule, and performance or technical aspects of the program.
e. Performance risks relate to cost and specific criteria. As a minimum, performance risk must be assessed for each area.

{AA-205} Source Selection Plan (SSP).
a. The SSP is a key document in conducting the source selection. It should include applicable Program Management Directive (PMD) guidance or direction and contain the elements described below to ensure timely staff review and SSA approval. The Program Office prepares a written SSP for all source selections conducted under this regulation.
(1) The SSP must be submitted sufficiently in advance of the planned acquisition action to permit review and approval by the SSA and early establishment of the SSAC or SSEB. If ASAF(A) or PDASAF(A&M) is the source selection authority, the SSP shall be sent to SAF/AQCS for coordination and approval by ASAF(A).
(2) When changes in acquisition strategy require a revision to the SSP, the Program Office will send the proposed revision through source selection channels to the SSA.
b. The plan shall include the following sections (support may be provided by documents referenced in and attached to the SSP):
(1) INTRODUCTION. Describe briefly what is being acquired.
(2) SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION. Describe the proposed SSA, SSAC, SSEB (or SSET) and PRAG (if used) organizations; list recommended key members by name, by position title, or by functional area. The plan must identify other government organizations that will be represented on the SSAC and SSEB.
(3) PROPOSED PRESOLICITATION ACTIVITIES. Describe the activities leading up to release of the solicitation, including market survey, draft solicitations, synopsis, solicitation review panel, and SSAC solicitation release meeting. For the market survey, discuss how it was used to achieve competition, including a discussion of screening criteria, if applicable.
(4) EVALUATION PROCEDURES. Specify the evaluation and rating methodology. Outline the process to be followed in formulating the government's best estimate of the total cost. Items that are considered to have sufficient cost impact to warrant special consideration will be separately identified. Items which represent nonquantifiable cost risks should be identified. Plans for developing Independent Cost Analysis (ICA), Most Probable Cost (MPC) and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) estimates will be presented. The cost criterion will not be rated but must be ranked in order of importance. The methodology to be followed for evaluating offeror's cost proposals must be described in the SSP.
(5) EVALUATION CRITERIA. Describe the cost (price) criterion and specific criteria including factors and, when appropriate, subfactors and elements. Describe the assessment criteria and how they apply to the evaluation. The relative importance of the cost (price) criterion, specific criteria, and general considerations will be stated. Assessment criteria must also be ranked in relative order of importance or identified as of equal importance. Describe general considerations and how they relate to the evaluation of the offeror's proposal.
(6) ACQUISITION STRATEGY. The SSP will include a summary of the acquisition strategy, including type of contract(s) proposed, the incentives contemplated, milestone demonstrations intended, special contract clauses, etc. The SSP acquisition strategy must reflect the strategy developed in the AP.

AA-12
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS
formed by the SSEB and the results of contract negotiations.
b. The SSAC must present to the SSA a report analyzing all relevant information resulting from the evaluation of proposals and other considerations to support a final selection decision by the SSA. As a minimum, the contents described in Attachment 8 shall be included in every SSAC Analysis Report.
c. The SSAC Analysis Report must portray to the SSA in narrative form the results of the evaluation of the proposals as well as the results of final discussions, BAFO, and other considerations. A cost evaluation summary track shall be provided from initial proposals through BAFO.
d. The Contracting Officer shall advise the SSAC and SSA when the responsibility of any offeror is questioned. The SSAC Analysis Report shall include this information.

{AA-315} Source Selection Briefings. Source Selection briefings are required by the SSAC and SSA. The SSEB chairperson is responsible for having the results of the evaluation briefed to the SSAC. The chairperson of the SSAC is responsible for having the results of the SSAC analysis briefed to the SSA. The recipients and the scope of the briefings depend on the organizational level at which the SSA has been established. All in attendance must complete a certification (see Attachment 11) in which they agree to safeguard source selection information (see paragraph AA-403). Any required briefings to the Secretariat to be held in the Pentagon shall be scheduled through SAF/AQCS who will control attendance.
a. When the SSA is the ASAF(A) or other official of the Secretariat and the briefing is held in the Pentagon, the following procedures shall be used:
(1) Unless otherwise approved by the chairman of the SSAC or the SSA, only members of the SSAC and advisors to the SSA shall attend the briefing. Necessary assistance will be provided by the designated SAF/AQCS action officer; and
(2) Copies of the slides and any text of oral presentations shall be provided to the SSA at the presentation. SAF/AQCS shall provide to the SSAC Chairperson, for the official file, a list of all the people who attend the briefings along with signed copies of the certification (see Attachment 11).
b. When SSA has been delegated to the PEO, DAC, or MAJCOM Commander, the SSA shall personally notify ASAF(A) of the award decision before the public announcement of the award.

{AA-316} Selection and Contract Award. The SSAC chairperson is responsible for preparing the Source Selection Decision Document for the SSA's signature. The assigned legal advisor and the senior contracting advisor shall coordinate on the Source Selection Decision Document. If the Source Selection Decision Document contains proprietary or source selection information, it shall be marked accordingly. The SSA's signature on the decision document is authority for the Contracting Officer to award a contract to the selected offeror(s) subject to the necessary administrative approvals. If the ASAF(A) or Secretary is the SSA, the Source Selection Decision Document is provided to SAF/AQCS for staffing and coordination with SAF/GCQ before it is presented to the SSA for signature. The approved Source Selection Decision Document is sent to the SSAC Chairperson who will provide it to the PCO, to include in the official contract file and the source selection record. This document contains:
a. The source selection decision;
b. Clear rational for the source selection decision. When award is made on a best value basis, the SSA should make a specific determination that the superiority of the higher priced proposal warrants the additional cost involved; and
c. Direction to accomplish award of a contract.

NOTES:
(1) It should be noted that this is a releasable document under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
(2) An example of the format of a Source Selection Decision Document is at Attachment 9. The attachment provides a format only. The actual decision document must include a detailed discussion of the rationale for each source selected.

{AA-317} Announcement of Source Selection Decision.
a. When the SSA is ASAF(A) or the PDASAF(A&M), as appropriate, SAF/AQ will be responsible for:
(1) Ensuring that news releases and announcements pertaining to the source selection action are prepared and coordinated with all necessary activities;
(2) Establishing an agreed time for release of award information, in accordance with 5305.303 and in conjunction with the Office of Legislative Liaison (SAF/LL) and Office of Public Affairs (SAF/PA) to ensure that contract

AA-21
AFAC 92--33 November 1, 1993 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

award, Congressional Announcement, and Public Announcement occur at the same time; and
(3) Notifying the contracting activity of the time for award of the contract.
b. When the ASAF(A) has delegated source selection authority, the SSA shall ensure that:
(1) Advance information of the decision is provided as may be required in the delegation of source selection authority;
(2) Information needed for Congressional Announcement is provided to SAF/LLP at the preestablished time (see 5305.303); and
(3) Information needed for press releases is provided to the local Office of Public Affairs at the preestablished time.

{AA-318} Notification and Debriefings.
a. Notifications. The Contracting Officer shall notify unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.1001.
b. Debriefings. Debriefings shall be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.1003. Comparisons shall not be made to other offerors' proposals:
(1) Debriefings will be with only one offeror at a time and will not be conducted until after contract award;
(2) The debriefing shall be confined to a discussion of the offeror's proposal, its strong and weak points in relation to the requirements of the solicitation and government risk assessments;
(3) Debriefings will be conducted promptly and frankly. When discussions were held, any weaknesses discussed during the debriefing should have already been discussed with the offeror in the form of a CR or a DR with the exception of weaknesses identified as a result of the BAFO response. The strengths and weaknesses identified in the debriefing should parallel those identified and documented by the SSEB, SSAC, and PRAG (if used);
(4) Debriefings can be conducted orally (either face-to-face or by telephone) or in writing. A formal briefing (charts and script) will be prepared, coordinated with legal counsel, contracting staff, and approval by the SSEB chairperson. A copy of the briefing charts and script will be provided to the offeror on request. The offeror should be encouraged to submit written questions in advance. If written questions are received, every effort should be made to either incorporate answers into the debriefing charts and script or provide written answers at the time of the debriefings;
(5) The contracting officer shall chair the debriefing session. The individuals actually responsible for the evaluations, such as the SSEB chairperson and evaluators shall provide the specific evaluation results. Open discussions are permitted on any aspect of the debriefings, including answers to written questions. Discussions regarding the validity of either the requirement or the evaluation process shall be avoided;
(6) Offerors may ask oral questions during debriefings in addition to written questions submitted prior to the debriefing. Government personnel shall attempt to answer all questions. However, the debriefing team should caucus before providing answers to any questions not provided in advance which are complex, unclear, or may potentially lead to the release of proprietary or classified information. All answers provided must be consistent with the information presented to the SSA and correspond to the areas evaluated during source selection. Occasionally, it may be necessary to provide the offeror with a written response after the debriefing. A written record of the debriefing presentation shall be made part of the official source selection file. A written summary of all questions and answers shall also be retained in the source selection file, and may be provided to the offeror; and
(7) A written debriefing may be conducted by providing the unsuccessful offeror with copies of the source selection decision document and those portions of the SSAC Analysis Report that relate to the offeror's proposal. The contracting officer may then permit the offeror to submit written questions. When written questions are permitted, they shall be answered promptly.

{AA-319} Lessons Learned. Following contract award, the Program Office shall determine if publishing a Lessons Learned report would benefit the source selection process. These reports should contain no source selection or proprietary information, no reference to the specific program involved, and be limited to pertinent issues that may be beneficial to future source selection actions and planning. The report (if prepared) should be provided to SAF/AQCS through the MAJCOM within 8 weeks after the source selection decision is announced.

AA-22
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS, ATTACHMENT 3

Secretariat and HQ USAF
Representatives for Acquisition Strategy Panels

Organization Title Office Symbol Phone

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Management SAF/AQX 703-697-9494
Policy and Program Integration)

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting) SAF/AQC 703-695-6332

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Cost and SAF/FMC 703-697-5311
Economics)

Assistant General Counsel for Acquisition SAF/GCQ 703-697-3900

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Communications SAF/AQK 703-697-3624
Computers and Support Systems)

Directorate of Space Programs SAF/AQS 703-695-1904

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Space SAF/SX 703-693-5799
Plans and Policy)

Deputy Chief of Staff, Command, AF/SC 703-695-6324
Control, Communications and Computers

Directorate of Fighter, C2, and SAF/AQP 703-695-2147
Weapons Programs

Directorate of Electronic and Special SAF/AQL 703-695-1256
Programs

Directorate of Long Range Power Projection, SAF/AQQ 703-695-3020
SOF, Airlift and Training Programs

Directorate of Science and Technology SAF/AQT 703-746-8899

AA-29
AFAC 92--33 November 1, 1993 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS, ATTACHMENT 4

SCHEDULE OF SOURCE SELECTION EVENTS

The following list of events are those which usually occur during a source selection. As a minimum, the Source Selection Plan must include a schedule of those events marked *. The cumulative elapsed time will be indicated at each of the events.

1. The Program Office develops the proposed acquisition strategy.

2. Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP) convened; SSA delegation is discussed.

3. The Contracting Officer places a synopsis in the Commerce Business Daily.

4. SSA delegation request is sent by the PEO/DAC or MAJCOM Commander to SAF/AQCS for staffing. If delegation is not recommended by the ASP, the SSAC Chairperson nomination is sent through the same channels. The Secretariat reply to either request will designate HQ USAF and Secretariat SSAC members and the SAF/AQCS focal point.

5. The Program Office conducts early industry involvement efforts.

6. The Program Office prepares a Source Selection Plan.

7. The Source Selection Plan is submitted to the SSA.

8*. The SSA approves the Source Selection Plan.

9. The Contracting Officer coordinates preparation of the solicitation.

10. The Program Office establishes evaluation standards for SSAC approval.

11. The Solicitation Review Panel reviews the solicitation.

12*. SSAC is formally established and convened to:

- Designate the chairperson and approve membership of the SSEB;

- Establish evaluation criteria weights, if used; and

13 Solicitation release (But see 5301.9006-9).

14. The Program Office provides a preproposal briefing to prospective offerors, if applicable.

15*. Proposals received--evaluation starts.

16. Oral presentations by offerors (Optional).

17*. Initial evaluations completed.

18*. Competitive range determination and SSEB initial evaluation briefing provided to SSAC members and SSAC meeting with SSA.

19*. Release of Deficiency Reports and Clarification Requests and start of discussions.
20*. Discussions completed.

21. Business clearance, legal review, and request for BAFO released.

22*. Receipt and evaluation of Best and Final Offers (BAFOs).

23*. SSEB (or SSET) Evaluation Report and briefings to SSAC.

24. SSAC Analysis Report completed.

25. SSAC briefing given to SSA.

26. Applicable briefings given by SSAC.

27. SSA decision.

28. SSA Decision Document completed.

29. Execution of contracts by the Contracting Officer.

30. SSA announces award, including the following simultaneous actions:

- Congressional Announcement;

- Public Announcement; and

- Contract Award.

31. Debriefings to offerors, upon their request.

32. Lessons Learned report (if prepared) submitted to SAF/AQCS.

AA-30
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX AA--FORMAL SOURCE SELECTION FOR MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate

Name:_________________ Grade:______ Job Title:________________________
Organization:_____________ Source Selection:_____________ Date:_______

Briefing Acknowledgment

1. I acknowledge I have been assigned to the source selection indicated above. I am aware that unauthorized disclosure of source selection or proprietary information could damage the integrity of this procurement and that the transmission or revelation of such information to unauthorized persons could subject me to prosecution under the Procurement Integrity Laws or under other applicable laws.

2. I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will not divulge, publish, or reveal by word, conduct or any other means, such information or knowledge, except as necessary to do so in the performance of my official duties related to this source selection and in accordance with the laws of the United States, unless specifically authorized in writing in each and every case by a duly authorized representative of the United States Government. I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and in the absence of duress.

3. I acknowledge that the information I receive will be given only to persons specifically granted access to the source selection information and may not be further divulged without specific prior written approval from an authorized individual.

4. If, at any time during the source selection process, my participation might result in a real, apparent, possible, or potential conflict of interest, I will immediately report the circumstances to the Source Selection Authority.

5. All personnel are requested to check the applicable block:

[ ] I have submitted a current SF Form 450, Executive Branch Personnel Confidential Financial Disclosure Report, or SF 278, Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure Report, as required by DoDD 5500.7.

[ ] I will submit a SF Form 450 or SF 278 to the SSEB chairperson within 10 working days from the date of this certification.

[ ] I am not required to submit a SF Form 450 or SF 278.

SIGNATURE:______________________________________ DATE:________

DEBRIEFING CERTIFICATE

I have been debriefed orally by____________________________________
as to my obligation to protect all information to which I have had access during this source selection. I no longer have any material pertinent to this source selection in my possession except material that I have been authorized in writing to retain by the SSA. I will not discuss, communicate, transmit, or release any information orally, in writing, or by any other means to anyone after this date unless specifically authorized to do so by a duly authorized representative of the United States Government.

_________________________________________________________________
Signature of Person Debriefed Date of Debriefing

_________________________________________________________________
Signature of Debriefer Date of Debriefing

AA-37

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER
THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title.................................. Paragraph Page

Part 1 - General Information

Scope.................................. BB-100 BB-3
Applicability.......................... BB-101 BB-3
Objective of the Source Selection
Process.............................. BB-102 BB-3
Terms Explained........................ BB-103 BB-3
Policies............................... BB-104 BB-4
Source Selection Authority (SSA)....... BB-105 BB-5
Source Selection Organization.......... BB-106 BB-5
Responsibilities and Duties............ BB-107 BB-6
Advisors............................... BB-108 BB-8
Conflicts of Interest.................. BB-109 BB-9
Interface with Contractors............. BB-110 BB-9
Plant Visits........................... BB-111 BB-9
Foreign Military Sales................. BB-112 BB-9
Deviations............................. BB-113 BB-9
Regulatory References.................. BB-114 BB-9

Part 2 - Pre-Evaluation Activities

Introduction...........................BB-201 BB-11
Acquisition Strategy...................BB-202 BB-11
Basis of Award, Evaluation Criteria
and General Considerations...........BB-203 BB-11
Source Selection Plan (SSP)............BB-204 BB-12
Developing Evaluation Standards........BB-205 BB-13
Solicitation...........................BB-206 BB-13
Notice of Source Selection Action......BB-207 BB-14

Part 3 - Proposal Evaluation and Source Selection Decision

General................................ BB-301 BB-15
Offerors Oral Presentations............ BB-302 BB-15
Technical Evaluation................... BB-303 BB-15
Use of Rating Techniques............... BB-304 BB-15
Assessment of Risk..................... BB-305 BB-17
Deficiency Reports (DRs)............... BB-306 BB-18
Clarification Requests (CRs)........... BB-307 BB-18
Narrative Assessments.................. BB-308 BB-19
Cost(Price) Evaluation................. BB-309 BB-19
Establish Consensus on Strengths and
Weaknesses within the Source
Selection Evaluation Team (SSET)..... BB-310 BB-20
Determination of the Competitive Range. BB-311 BB-20
Conducting Written or Oral Discussions. BB-312 BB-20
The Proposal Analysis Report (PAR)..... BB-313 BB-21
Source Selection Briefings............. BB-314 BB-21
Selection and Contract Award........... BB-315 BB-22
Announcement of Source Selection
Decision............................. BB-316 BB-22

BB-1
AFAC 92--(sic) January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT

APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Title Paragraph Page

Notification and Debriefings........... BB-317 BB-23
Lessons Learned........................ BB-318 BB-23
Security Requirements.................. BB-319 BB-23

Part 4 -Source Selection Documentation and Release of Information

General................................ BB-401 BB-25
Source Selection Records............... BB-402 BB-25
Protecting Source Selection Records.... BB-403 BB-26

Attachments

Title Attachment No. Page

Source Selection Organization............... 1 BB-29
Schedule of Source Selection Events......... 2 BB-31
Sample Source Selection Plan................ 3 BB-33
Sample Source Selection Evaluation
Guide (w/Example of Matrix Evaluation).... 4 BB-39
Examples of Evaluation Standards............ 5 BB-59
Format for Preparing Deficiency Reports
or Clarification Requests................. 6 BB-61
Sample SSET Proposal Analysis Report........ 7 BB-63
Sample Source Selection Decision Document... 8 BB-65
Source Selection Information Cover Sheet.... 9 BB-67
Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate............................... 10 BB-69

BB-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER
THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title.................................. Paragraph Page

Part 1 - General Information

Part 2 - Pre-Evaluation Activities

Part 3 - Proposal Evaluation and Source Selection Decision

BB-1
AFAC 92--(sic) January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Title Paragraph Page

Notification and Debriefings........... BB-317 BB-23
Lessons Learned........................ BB-318 BB-23
Security Requirements.................. BB-319 BB-23

Part 4 -Source Selection Documentation and Release of Information

General................................ BB-401 BB-25
Source Selection Records............... BB-402 BB-25
Protecting Source Selection Records.... BB-403 BB-26

Attachments

Title Attachment No. Page

Source Selection Organization............... 1 BB-29
Schedule of Source Selection Events......... 2 BB-31
Sample Source Selection Plan................ 3 BB-33
Sample Source Selection Evaluation
Guide (w/Example of Matrix Evaluation).... 4 BB-39
Examples of Evaluation Standards............ 5 BB-59
Format for Preparing Deficiency Reports
or Clarification Requests................. 6 BB-61
Sample SSET Proposal Analysis Report........ 7 BB-63
Sample Source Selection Decision Document... 8 BB-65
Source Selection Information Cover Sheet.... 9 BB-67
Source Selection Information Briefing
Certificate............................... 10 BB-69

BB-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Part 1 - GENERAL INFORMATION

BB-100 Scope.

This appendix establishes policy, assigns responsibilities and prescribes implementing procedures for soliciting and evaluating offerors proposals for other than major acquisitions conducted by Air Force contracting activities. This appendix implements Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 15.6, Source Selection, and fulfills the responsibilities of the Air Force agency head for source selection contained in FAR 15.604(a) and 15.612(b).

BB-101 Applicability.

This appendix is intended to be used in operational, logistics, environmental and laboratory environments, as well as for lower-dollar systems acquisitions, which are competitive negotiated procurements below the thresholds of AFFARS Appendix AA (See AA-101) or procurements in which the source selection authority decides that use of Appendix BB would be more appropriate than Appendix AA. AFFARS Appendix BB describes procedures for a less complex source selection. If the SSA determines that a Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) and a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) are appropriate, the procedures applicable to the SSAC and SSEB are addressed in Appendix AA. Each MAJCOM and FOA/DRU having contracting authority is encouraged to establish specific procedures implementing this appendix (e.g. establishing lower dollar thresholds) in order to tailor the process for its own individual requirements and organization. The policies and procedures in this appendix need not be applied to acquisitions for basic research; acquisitions under $5 million; or any other acquisition for which the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) determines to be inappropriate. Those acquisitions will use FAR 15.6 procedures. The use of these procedures for architect-engineer services is prohibited.

BB-102 Objective of the Source Selection Process.

The objective of the source selection process is to select the source whose proposal has the highest degree of credibility and whose performance can be expected to best meet the government's requirements at an affordable cost. The process must provide an impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of the competitors proposals and related capabilities. The process should be accomplished with minimum complexity and maximum efficiency and effectiveness. This process contemplates the use of resources proportional to the less complex nature of the applicable acquisitions. Price analysis techniques should generally be adequate for these requirements; if adequate price competition is anticipated, certified cost and pricing data shall not be required, although data sufficient to accomplish cost realism analysis may be requested. You must have a sufficient number of discriminators to be able to adequately evaluate the proposals. Generally, you do not need as many criteria as in major source selections; however, the individual requirement should be considered when establishing criteria. The source selection should be structured to balance technical, financial, and economic or business considerations consistent with the requirement, and business and legal constraints.

BB-103 Terms Explained.

a. Acquisition Plan (AP). A comprehensive plan for fulfilling agency needs in a timely manner and at a reasonable cost. The acquisition plan contains the overall strategy for managing the acquisition. (See FAR Part 7 and supplements.)

b. Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP). A group of functional experts who serve in an advisory capacity by reviewing and recommending acquisition strategies for a specific product or service.

c. Advisors. Government or non-government personnel, designated by the SSA who provide advice to the SSA or Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET).

d. Assessment Criteria. Evaluation criteria which are used by evaluators in performing the technical evaluation by relating certain aspects of an offeror's proposal to specific evaluation criteria.

e. Best and Final Offer (BAFO). A final proposal submission by all offerors in the competitive range submitted at a common cut-off date at the request of the Contracting Officer after conclusion of discussions. (See FAR 15.611 and supplements.)

f. Best Value. Most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered. Provides the best mix of utility, technical quality, business aspects, risks, and price for a given requirement.

g. Clarification. Data, generally of an administrative nature, provided to resolve inadequate proposal content or contradictory statements in the proposal
h. Contract Team. A group of government personnel within the Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET) who are responsible for evaluating cost (price) proposals and negotiating the contracts.

i. Deficiency. For the purposes of source selection actions, a deficiency is defined as any part of an offeror's proposal

BB-3
AFAC 92-(sic) January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

which, when compared to a pertinent standard, fails to meet the government's minimum level of compliance.

j. Essential Characteristics or Baseline Requirements. A qualitative/quantitative measure that describes the bottom of the range of each requirement or effort as set forth in the Statement of Work or the Performance Work Statement.

k. Evaluation Criteria. The basis for measuring each offerors ability, as expressed in its proposal, to meet the government's needs as stated in the solicitation.

l. Evaluation Standards. A standard establishes a uniform baseline against which each offeror's solution is compared to determine its value to the government.

m. General Consideration. An area of evaluation in the source selection that typically relates to issues such as proposed contractual terms and conditions, results of preaward surveys, and other surveys or reviews.

n. Minimum Mandatory Requirement. The absolute lowest threshold acceptable in performance and capability.

o. Performance Risk. The assessment of an offeror's present and past work record to assess confidence in the offeror's ability to successfully perform as proposed.

p. Proposal Analysis Report. The report prepared by the source selection evaluation team during the source selection that fully documents the results of the technical evaluation, cost analysis, and contract/business issues resolutions.

q. Proposal Risk. The risks that are identified with an offeror's proposed approach as it relates to accomplishing the requirements of the solicitation.

r. Solicitation Review Process. Review of Draft Requests for Proposals (DRFP) (if used), Requests for Proposals (RFPs) and other documentation for selected acquisitions by a group of highly qualified government officials to ascertain among other things that excessive or nonessential requirements are eliminated; that the solicitation clearly describes what the government plans to buy; and that business management considerations are properly incorporated.

s. Source Selection Authority (SSA). The official designated to direct the source selection process and make the source selection decision.

t. Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET). A group of government personnel representing the various functional and technical disciplines relevant to the acquisition that evaluates proposals and reports its findings to the SSA.

u. Source Selection Plan (SSP). A plan, approved by the SSA, that describes in detail how source selection personnel are organized, how the proposals will be evaluated and analyzed, and how the source or sources will be selected.

v. Specific Criteria. A subset of evaluation criteria that relate to specific requirement s characteristics. Specific criteria typically are divided into technical and/or management areas. These areas are divided into factors, which are further divided into subfactors and elements, as necessary, depending on the complexity of the factor being evaluated.

w. Strength. A significant, outstanding, or exceptional aspect of an offeror s proposal that exceeds the evaluation standard. It provides a useful capability that will be included in the specification, or statement of work, or is inherent in the offeror s process.

x. Weakness. An aspect of or omission from an offeror s proposal that contributes to a deficiency in meeting an evaluation standard or is otherwise a shortcoming of the proposal that will degrade contract performance.

BB-104 Policies. The following policies apply:

a. It is Air Force policy to provide for full and open competition, or when full and open competition is not possible (see FAR Parts 6 and 19), to obtain competition to the maximum extent practicable.

b. The SSA shall be presented with sufficient in-depth information on each of the competing offerors and their proposals to permit a reasoned, rational selection decision.

c. The SSET should include personnel possessing broad experience in specific fields, such as appropriate technical or functional specialties related to the statement of work, finance, logistics, law and contracting. Only fully qualified personnel possessing the professional skills and knowledge required for an objective evaluation and assessment of offeror s proposals should be selected to participate on the SSET.

d. The senior person from the office responsible for the requirement most knowledgeable about the requirement is usually designated the SSET chairperson.

e. Early industry involvement including the use of draft RFPs (when appropriate) is recommended to obtain comments. The contracting officer may request industry feedback on contract type, performance, schedule, Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs), specifications, state-

BB-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

ments of work, and other requirements that impact costs or restrict technical solutions. Equal access for all potential offerors must be afforded and a cut-off date will be established for receipt of comments to permit government evaluation and incorporation of accepted changes into the formal solicitation. The personnel responsible for the requirement shall evaluate recommendations, make appropriate changes in conjunction with the contracting officer and provide written feedback to industry on disposition of the recommendations within a predetermined timeframe.

f. The rating system used in evaluating and analyzing proposals shall be described in the SSP. The rating system shall be structured to evaluate whether the offeror s proposal meets the evaluation criteria in Section M of the RFP, as well as the strengths, weaknesses and risks associated with each proposal. The rating system must at a minimum include written narratives at the factor level and subfactor level and descriptive color coding at the factor level. (See paragraph BB-304.) The objective of the rating system is to display an assessment of all important aspects of the offeror s proposal as they relate to Section M criteria. Since numerical rating systems do not allow consideration of all possible variables associated with a source selection, they should not be used. The objective of the evaluation is to provide a true assessment of the value the proposed effort to the Government. If a strength is noted during technical evaluation, the government must be assured of receiving the benefits associated with the strength under the contract. If we are not going to receive a benefit, it is not a strength.

g. Evaluation criteria include cost(price) criterion, specific criteria, and assessment criteria. These criteria should include those things considered important to the customer about the specific requirement, such as quality of service, environmental considerations, manpower, personnel, policies, procedures, and management. General considerations, combined with use of the evaluation criteria, provide an integrated assessment that forms the basis for award. General considerations shall be ranked to describe if the considerations are of equal importance or if one or more are of more importance than any other. Past performance shall not be used as a general consideration if past performance is assessed as performance risk or as a separate specific evaluation criteria Section M of the solicitation shall clearly state how general considerations will be used to evaluate each offeror s proposal.

h. When baseline requirements are used, and an offeror does not meet the essential characteristics or baseline requirements, the Government may still consider their offer; however, it will be rated as less technically acceptable than offers that meet the essential characteristics or baseline requirements.

i. Except where award without discussions is planned in accordance with FAR 15.610, and a statement to that effect has been inserted in the RFP, you shall conduct written or oral discussions with all offerors in the competitive range. These discussions should lead to submission of BAFOs, which will culminate in signed contractual documents representing the firm commitment of each such offeror.

j. The use of auctioning techniques, such as indicating to an offeror a price which must be met to obtain further consideration, or informing an offeror that its price is not low in relation to that of another offeror, are strictly prohibited. This prohibition does not preclude discussing price or cost elements that are not clear or appear to be unreasonable or unjustified. Discussions may encourage offerors to put forward their most favorable price proposals. However, the price elements of any other offeror must not be discussed, disclosed, or compared. Technical leveling and technical transfusion through discussions with offerors are also strictly prohibited (See FAR 15.610(d) and (e)).

k. The request for BAFO must not be used as either an auctioning technique or to pressure offerors to lower prices. All changes in price, technical approach, or terms and conditions at BAFO must be substantiated by offerors. The common cut-off date for conclusion of discussions and requests for a BAFO must be scheduled to ensure that all competitors have an equal opportunity for discussion.

l. The techniques in this appendix shall not be used when award will be made to the lowest cost technically acceptable offer, because this acquisition method does not include an integrated assessment. (See AFFARS 5315.605(c)(90).

BB-105 Source Selection Authority (SSA). The SSA will be the HCA, commander of FOAs/DRUs, the PEO, or DAC with power of delegation to lower levels on a case by case basis or blanket basis. The delegation must be in writing. Blanket delegations may be done by command guidance. SSAs should be of sufficient grade and hold positions which enable them to be familiar with the objectives of the work being contracted.

BB-106 Source Selection Organization. When using these procedures, a separate source selection organization and management chain of command (SSA and SSET) shall be established for each source selection. Personnel assigned to source selections will not reveal source selection information to personnel outside of the source selection in their normal chain of command. The organization must be structured to ensure continuity, and to provide for active ongoing involvement of appropriate contracting, technical, logistics, legal, cost, and other functional staff

BB-5
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

management expertise. See Attachment 1 for a diagram of a typical source selection organization. The source selection organization must be consistent with the organization described in the SSP. The SSET is comprised of a technical team and a contracts team. Each team may contain as few as one person in BB source selections.

BB-107 Responsibilities and Duties. A successful source selection requires teamwork. Members of the SSET from all disciplines must work together to ensure that the SSA is presented an accurate integrated assessment of each offeror s proposal in accordance with Section M of the RFP. Each member shall be given access to the full range of evaluation tools available, including the advice of personnel in other disciplines who serve as source selection advisors. The listing of key responsibilities and duties below are not in chronological order. Their sequence can vary widely depending upon the circumstances surrounding a given source selection.

a. The SSA is responsible for the proper and efficient conduct of the entire source selection process encompassing proposal solicitation, evaluation, selection and contract award. The SSA has, subject to law and applicable regulations, full responsibility and authority to select source(s) for award and approve the execution of contracts. The SSA shall:

(1) Review and approve in writing the SSP including any special instructions or guidance regarding solicitation provisions, contract clauses and objectives before release of the RFP;

(2) Approve members and advisors selected by the SSET Chairperson;

(3) Provide the SSET with guidance and instructions for conducting the source selection;

(4) Caution all involved in the source selection of the consequences of unauthorized disclosure of source selection information;

(5) Approve the Contracting Officer s competitive range determination. This approval may be delegated to the SSET chairperson (without further delegation) except that authority to exclude any offeror from the competitive range (at any time during the source selection process) is not delegable;

(6) Make selection decisions and document the supporting rationale in the Source Selection Decision Document;

(7) Coordinate on any Contracting Officer decision to request more than one BAFO. (See 5315.611);

b. The SSET Chairperson shall:

(1) Ensure that personnel resources and time assigned to source selection reflect the complexity of the requirement;

(2) Appoint members and advisors to the SSET, subject to approval of the SSA;

(3) Ensure that all persons receiving source selection information are instructed to comply with applicable standards of conduct (see paragraph BB-403);

(4) Designate the chairperson of each SSET technical evaluation team and approve structure of the SSET technical evaluation teams;

(5) Review and approve the evaluation standards and rank order of criteria developed by the personnel responsible for the requirement;

(6) Review and recommend approval of the SSP to the SSA;

(7) Serve as a member of the solicitation review process;

(8) Ensure that SSET and advisors are briefed on their responsibilities before any proposal is reviewed, including details on how the evaluation will be conducted;

(9) Convene the SSET to analyze offers and develop the PAR for submission to the SSA;

(10) Review the Contracting Officer s competitive range determination and provide comments to the SSA;

(11) Review and approve issuance of Deficiency Reports (DRs) (See paragraph BB-306);

(12) Review and approve Clarification Requests (CRs) (See paragraph BB-307);

(13) Provide briefings and consultation at the request of the SSA;

(14) Offer a recommendation for contract award for the SSA s consideration, but only when requested by the SSA;

(15) Ensure that a Source Selection Decision Document is prepared for the SSA s signature, unless otherwise directed by the SSA;

BB-6
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

(16) Ensure that all source selection team members execute the Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate (See Attachment 10);

(17) When award is made without discussions, review any deficiencies of the other offerors with the SSA and

(18) Approve the technical content of the formal contractor debriefing.

c. The SSET shall:

(1) Include a Contract Team as an integral part of the SSET. The Contracting Officer normally will be appointed the head of the Contract Team;

(2) Conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of each proposal, any proposal revisions, and any BAFO against the solicitation requirements as set forth in section M of the RFP, the approved evaluation criteria, and the evaluation standards, generating CRs/DRs in the process;

(3) Provide briefings and consultations concerning the evaluation as required by the SSA or SSET Chairperson;

(4) Prepare and submit the Proposal Analysis Report to the SSET Chairperson for review; and

(5) Not recommend an awardee to the SSA, unless specifically requested by the SSA.

d. The personnel responsible for the requirement shall:

(1) Develop the acquisition strategy in conjunction with the contracting officer, and prepare the AP (when required by FAR 7.103 as supplemented) and SSP;

(2) Propose the evaluation criteria for SSA approval as part of the SSP;

(3) Propose the relative importance of the evaluation criteria in the SSP and, in conjunction with the contracting officer, develop the specific language to be included in Section M of the solicitation;

(4) Propose evaluation standards that relate to the evaluation criteria in Section M of the RFP;

(5) Develop screening criteria (if desired or required by regulations) for establishing a source list and include the screening criteria in the SSP;

(6) Prepare the SSP for approval by the SSA after it is coordinated with appropriate senior source selection advisors;

(7) Prepare and furnish to the SSET an independent Government assessment of potential proposal risks before receipt of proposals; and

(8) Prepare the Statement of Work or Performance Work Statement with all supporting attachments and documentation.

e. The Contracting Officer shall:

(1) Chair the Contract Team and be responsible for all business aspects of the procurement;

(2) Prepare any required requests for delegation;

(3) Initiate and schedule the ASP (if used);

(4) Prepare the RFP, obtain approval of the RFP, the Acquisition Plan, and Source Selection Plan and then release the RFP;

(5) Notify SAF/AQCS that the source selection is in process (See paragraph BB-207);

(6) Provide training in source selection matters to the SSET members;

(7) Ensure that all non governmental technical advisors are covered by an organizational conflict of interest (OCI) clause covering non-disclosure of contractor data in their respective contracts (see FAR 9.5). If the respective contracts do not contain this clause, the non-government technical advisors shall not be permitted to participate in the source selection or have access to any source selection data whatsoever;

(8) Serve as the sole point of contact between offerors and the government during the source selection process;

(9) Issue any required RFP amendments;

(10) Receive proposals from offerors;

(11) Request preaward surveys and audits, as appropriate;

(12) Release letters to offerors that are outside competitive range concurrently with the release of CRs/DRs to contractors within the competitive range;

(13) Receive responses to CRs/DRs;

BB-7
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

(14) Chair any discussions with contractors and ensure that the same team members participate in all discussions with all offerors;

(15) Request, receive and evaluate any revisions to proposals and Best and Final Offers;

(16) Prepare the contract(s);

(17) Ensure all required business clearances are obtained before awarding without discussions or requesting BAFOs. Contract clearance (if required) shall be obtained before announcement of the selection decision;

(18) Send DD-LA(AR) 1279 report to SAF/LLP to announce contract award (see 5305.303-90);

(19) Send out size challenge letters, if small business set-aside;

(20) Award the contract to the successful offeror, distribute the contract, issue notice of contract award, and notify unsuccessful offerors;

(21) Conduct postaward conference with awardee; and
(22) Promptly conduct frank and open debriefings with any offeror, at their request (see SAF/AQC policy letter AFAC 92-34).

f. Chief of Contracting or Deputy shall:

(1) Serve as primary advisor to the installation or activity commander on source selection policy and participate as a member of ASPs and as SSET advisor on source selections;

(2) Assign appropriate contracting individuals to participate in acquisition strategy panels;

(3) Ensure that a solicitation review process is initiated, as appropriate; and

(4) Maintain a schedule of key source selection events. Times, dates and locations for meetings should be planned and scheduled as far in advance as possible, giving due consideration to potential conflicts and potential consolidation with other significant events. As a minimum, the key events shall include:

(A) The solicitation release authorization;

(B) Presentation or briefing of the initial evaluation results including competitive range determinations; and

BB-108 Advisors.

a. Government and non-government experts may be called upon to provide advisory assistance to the SSA or SSET. Advisors may objectively review a proposal in a particular functional area and provide comments and recommendations to the government s decision makers. They may not determine strengths and weaknesses, establish initial or final assessments of risks, or actually rate or rank offeror s proposals.

b. The following additional restrictions are placed on non-government advisors. Non-government advisors shall not be:

(1) Provided offeror proprietary, confidential or privileged commercial or financial data unless prior written consent is obtained from the offeror;

(2) Allowed to participate in oral presentations or discussions, unless the SSA or SSET chairperson formally request a deviation to this policy from the Senior Contracting Official; and

(3) Allowed to participate in government decision making meetings, such as SSA briefings, unless the SSA or SSET chairperson requests that they be present during a particular portion of the meeting when they may be called upon to provide technical expertise.

c. When non-government advisors are used, the solicitation must include a provision advising offerors that non-government contractor employees will have access to proposals (see FAR 15.413-2(f)). A provision may be included in the solicitation identifying the non-government advisors and their employees and advising that any objection to disclosure:

(1) Should be provided in writing prior to the date set for receipt of proposals; and

(2) Shall include a detailed statement of the basis for the objection.

d. An organizational conflict of interest (OCI) clause covering non-disclosure of contractor data shall be included in each contract that provides non governmental technical advisors where the contractor will participate as a non-government advisor to a source selection (see FAR 9.5).

BB-8
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

BB-109 Conflicts of Interest. All selection process (including non-Air Force personnel) will be instructed to inform the SSA if their participation in source selection activities might result in a real, apparent, possible, or potential conflict of interest. When so advised, the SSA will disqualify any person whose participation in the source selection process could raise questions regarding real, apparent, possible, or potential conflicts of interest.

BB-110 Interface with Contractors. All personnel must be cautioned that only the Contracting Officer may commit the U.S. Government. Personnel involved in the source selection must avoid any situation or contact with any competing offeror that is not essential, or would raise questions of impropriety. The objectivity of the source selection process may be impaired by contacts between government personnel and prime/subcontractors involved in the competition during the period between the release of the solicitation and announcement of the source selection decision. Contacts with prospective contractors regarding the specific source selection must be avoided, except for personnel directly participating in source selection discussions and contract negotiations.

BB-111 Plant Visits. If plant visits are contemplated, follow the procedures in AFFARS Appendix AA-111.

BB-112 Foreign Military Sales. For procurements involving foreign military sales, see the guidance at AFFARS Appendix AA-113.

BB-113 Deviations. Deviations to this appendix may be granted only by SAF/AQC when use of this appendix is required. Requests for deviations must be submitted in writing through SAF/AQCS. When use of this appendix is discretionary, the SSA may approve deviations.

BB-114 Regulatory References. A list of key regulatory references pertaining to source selection is provided in Attachment 2 of AFFARS Appendix AA.

BB-9
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-10
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Part 2 - PRE-EVALUATION ACTIVITIES

BB-201 Introduction. This part explains the major steps in the source selection process that occur before receipt of initial proposals.

BB-202 Acquisition Strategy. Comply with AFFARS 5307.104-91 regarding the use of Acquisition Strategy Panels (ASPs)

BB-203 Basis of Award, Evaluation Criteria and General Considerations.

a. The basis for source selection and award of a contract must be limited to criteria or considerations that are set forth in the solicitation. Therefore, it is mandatory that the RFP clearly state all characteristics of the requirement that will be considered by the Air Force in making the source selection. Air Force source selection awards are based on an integrated assessment of each offeror s cost(price) criterion, specific criteria, assessment criteria, proposal risk, performance risk, and general considerations. These criteria are set forth in a structured manner in Section M of the RFP. Section M serves as the rules of engagement for the source selection.

b. Evaluation criteria should be tailored to the characteristics of a requirement and should include only those significant aspects expected to have an impact on the ultimate selection decision. There must be a sufficient number of discriminators to effectively evaluate the offeror s proposal. The number of criteria is driven by the requirement. Care should be taken to ensure that arbitrary decisions are not made as to how many criteria should be established for a procurement of a given estimated value or for a given type of technical application. Evaluation criteria consist of three types: cost(price) criterion, specific criteria, and assessment criteria. The technical and contracting team members should work together to develop a list of the key characteristics that distinguish poor from good performance of a given requirement. This is the list of key discriminators that will be the basis for all evaluation criteria. If a proposed criteria would not prevent award to an offeror with an unacceptable response, then it is not a key discriminator and should not be used as an evaluation criteria. These criteria should include those things considered important to the customer about the specific requirement, such as quality of service, environmental considerations, and management. The cost(price) criterion relates to the evaluation of the offeror s proposed costs(price). The assessment criteria serve as a basis for evaluating each offeror s proposal as it relates to the specific criteria. Factors and subfactors may be created to support those criteria. See Attachment 4 for an example of the general format of the evaluation matrix.

(1) Cost(price) is a mandatory evaluation criterion that shall be evaluated as a factor in every AFFARS Appendix BB source selection to determine realism, completeness, and reasonableness. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor has appropriately considered all aspects of cost(price). Examples of this factor might be instant contract cost(price), or disposal cost of hazardous material. Do not use color or risk ratings for cost. Use the results of pricing techniques described in FAR 15.8 or the Armed Services Pricing Manual (ASPM). (See BB-309 Cost (Price) Evaluation).

(A) For the cost(price) to be realistic, it must reflect what it would cost the offeror to perform the effort, if he operates with reasonable economy and efficiency. The cost(price) should not put the offeror in a situation where, in order to earn profit, he not only must perform perfectly, but everything else on the contract must be perfect as well, including the specifications, statement of work, performance work statement, etc. Allow room for some rework and corrections to occur - after all, in most cases, this is what really happens during contract performance. If the offeror s technical or manpower proposal identifies 100 manyears of effort, then the pricing should also reflect 100 manyears of cost.

(B) For the cost(price) data to be complete, the offeror must provide all the data that is necessary to support the offer. The amount of data needed will vary depending on the requirement. If you are using price analysis, you may only need information about the catalog price or the price at which the item has been sold in the recent past. If you are buying something that is being specially made for the Government, you may need information on the cost of raw materials, labor, scrap rates, etc.. To reduce the burden on the Government and the offeror, the amount of detail needed in this area should be carefully tailored to the requirement.

(C) For the cost(price) to be reasonable, it must represent a reasonable compromise between the seller s and the buyer s opinions of what constitutes a fair price. Reasonable is a personal judgment that takes into account the context of a given source selection, including current market conditions and other factors that affect the ability of an offeror to perform the contract requirement. Therefore, fair and reasonable should be considered in three dimensions: fair under current market conditions, reasonable to the seller, and reasonable to the buyer.

(2) Specific criteria relate to requirement characteristics. They relate to what the offeror has proposed to do. The specific criteria are typically divided into technical

BB-11
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

and/or management evaluation areas. Examples of specific criteria might include major areas of performance, general facility maintenance, control of government assets, and management. These areas are typically divided into factors, which may be further divided into subfactors and elements, as necessary, depending on the complexity or variety of the qualities or conditions of the factor being evaluated. Factors should be related to characteristics which are important to successful contract performance. The SSP and Section M will state the level at which color/adjectival ratings will be assigned.

(A) A source selection may have essential characteristics or baseline requirements or a combination of minimum mandatory requirements and essential characteristics or baseline requirements.

(B) Not all source selections will use minimum mandatory requirements. If used, minimum mandatory requirements shall be completely described in the solicitation and evaluated as such. When used, they become a pass/fail or go/no go decision. They are displayed as a green if the offeror passes or a red if the offeror fails in the SSA briefing.

(3) Assessment criteria form the basis for evaluating each offeror s proposal in regard to the relevant evaluation criteria. They relate to how the contractor will perform the effort or satisfy the requirement. Evaluators use assessment criteria in conjunction with evaluation standards to judge how well an offeror s proposal satisfies each of the relevant evaluation criteria. Soundness of approach, completeness, and compliance are common assessment criteria. Did the offeror propose an effective and efficient method to perform the effort? Did the proposal adequately describe how the factor, subfactor and/or element (as appropriate) will be performed? Did the proposal offer to perform what was requested in the solicitation?

c. General considerations may relate to issues such as proposed contractual terms and conditions, results of preaward surveys, past performance (if performance risk methodology is not used), and other surveys or reviews.

d. At a minimum, proposal risks must be assessed for each area.

e. At a minimum, performance risk must be assessed for each area, unless it assessed as a general consideration or specific criteria.

BB-204 Source Selection Plan (SSP).

a. The SSP is a key document for initiating and conducting the source selection. It should contain the elements described below to ensure timely review and SSA approval (See Attachment 3). The SSP should be jointly developed by the contracting personnel and personnel responsible for the requirement.. It must be submitted sufficiently in advance of the planned acquisition action to facilitate review and approval by the SSA and early establishment of the source selection organization. The SSP must be approved before release of the solicitation.

b. The SSP will conform with FAR Subpart 15.6 as supplemented. It will address the issues below and other things that are important or unusual about a given acquisition. The SSP should contain a crisp description of the acquisition situation. If an extended discussion of any issue is required, supporting details may be provided in separate documents attached to the SSP. Ideally, the wording used in much of the SSP should be identical to the wording used in other documents related to this effort, such as, the acquisition plan, acquisition strategy panel minutes, or the solicitation. (See paragraph c(5) of this subsection.)

c. The plan should contain the following sections:

(1) INTRODUCTION. Describe briefly what is being acquired.

(2) SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION. Describe the proposed SSA and SSET organizations (including Government and non-government advisors); list recommended key members by name, by position title, or by functional area. The plan must identify other government organizations that will be represented on the SSET.

(3) PRESOLICITATION ACTIVITIES. Describe the activities leading up to release of the solicitation, including market survey, draft solicitations, synopsis, solicitation review process, and solicitation release meeting. For the market survey, discuss how it was used to achieve competition, including a discussion of screening criteria, if applicable.

(4) EVALUATION PROCEDURES. This section discusses the process that will be used by the SSET to evaluate offeror s proposals and develop a Proposal Analysis Report. In other words, it describes what the SSET will do and how they will document what they did. Describe how the proposals will be evaluated and how they will be rated. Describe how the Government estimate was developed, including any cost drivers that have been identified. Describe how those cost drivers will be treated by the pricing team during proposal evaluation. Although the cost(price) criterion will not be given a color or a risk rating during proposal evaluation, the process that will be

BB-12
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

used to evaluate offeror s proposals must be described in this section.

(5) EVALUATION CRITERIA. Describe the cost(price) criterion and specific criteria including areas, factors and, when appropriate, subfactors and elements. The information in this section must be exactly duplicated in Section M of the RFP. Describe the assessment criteria and how they apply to the evaluation. The relative importance of the Cost(price) criterion, specific criteria, and general considerations will be stated. Assessment criteria must also be ranked in relative order of importance or identified as of equal importance. Describe general considerations and how they relate to the evaluation of the offeror s proposal.

(6) ACQUISITION STRATEGY. The SSP will include a summary of the acquisition strategy, including type of contract(s) proposed, any incentive arrangements, special contract clauses, etc. The SSP acquisition strategy must reflect the strategy developed in the AP.

(7) SCHEDULE OF EVENTS. Identify and establish the schedule for significant source selection activities in sufficient detail to allow the reviewing authorities to assess the practicality of the schedule. The schedule of events in Attachment 2 may be used as a guide.

(8) NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS. The source selection plan shall address the use of non-government advisors. (See FAR 15.413-2(f) and paragraph BB-108).

d. The SSP shall be formally approved by the SSA before issuing the solicitation.

BB-205 Developing Evaluation Standards.

a. The SSET will measure each proposal against a predetermined set of objective standards. The SSET shall not compare proposals against each other.

b. A standard establishes a uniform baseline against which each offeror s proposal is compared to determine its value to the government. It incorporates any minimum requirement or minimum mandatory requirement. It establishes the level an offeror s proposal must meet in any factor, subfactor, or element to be judged acceptable (green) as set forth in paragraph BB-304. A standard may be either quantitative or qualitative, depending on the criteria it addresses (see Attachment 5 for examples).

c. Evaluation standards shall not be included in the SSP or the solicitation. They are an internal document that is used by the SSET to perform evaluations. They should normally be defined and documented prior to the release of the solicitation, but must be approved before receipt of proposals, and shall not be changed once any offeror s proposal is opened. Evaluation standards shall not be released to any potential offeror nor to anyone who is not directly involved in the source selection evaluation effort.

BB-206 Solicitation.

a. The Contracting Officer is responsible for preparing the solicitation. Personnel responsible for the requirement are responsible for preparing key portions of the RFP, such as the statement of work and the data requirements. The solicitation must accurately convey to offerors the technical, schedule, cost and contractual requirements of the acquisition. In addition:

(1) The solicitation should be kept short and uncomplicated. Most applicable regulations may be referenced rather than reprinted. Personnel responsible for the requirement, in conjunction with the Contracting Officer, may establish a technical library that potential offerors can visit, rather than include voluminous descriptions in the RFP. How or where the technical library or other referenced documents can be accessed should be included in the RFP.

(2) A major cause of lengthy source selections is a proliferation of evaluation areas, factors, subfactors and elements which, in turn, results in lengthy proposals and evaluation sessions. Too often, these evaluations involve areas factors, subfactors and elements which are not source selection discriminators. The choice of evaluation areas factors, subfactors and elements should be tailored to that which is essential to the selection of the best offeror. In some instances, this may be done by combining a number of similar factors into one overall factor. Sufficient time must be provided for evaluation consistent with the nature of the acquisition. This requires planning by the SSET chairperson to optimize the number of areas, factors, subfactors and elements to fit within the time allotted for evaluation. Acquisitions for unusual requirements or those likely to result in many proposals may require more evaluation time.

(3) The evaluation criteria and general considerations must be an exact duplicate of those in the approved SSP. The solicitation shall indicate the relative importance among cost(price) criterion, specific evaluation criteria (including areas, factors, and any significant subfactors or elements), and general considerations. Assessment criteria must also be ranked in relative order of importance" or identified as of equal importance. Examples of relative importance could be "all factors are of equal importance" or "all factors and subfactors are listed in descending order of

BB-13
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

importance". It must also state the relationship between price and all other factors (lesser, greater, or equal importance). If contract requirements or evaluation criteria originally established in the solicitation change before contract award, each offeror shall be informed by a solicitation amendment of the revised criteria and basis for award. Offerors shall then be given a reasonable time to revise their proposals. After proposals have been received, a change in evaluation criteria or requirements may require resolicitation (see FAR 15.606).

(4) Section L of the solicitation should state how the government wants the offerors to structure their proposals. This includes guidance concerning the type and content of volumes required, cross-referencing SOW/PWS paragraph requirements to the proposal, page limitations, what is excluded from the page count, suggested level of detail in the proposal, etc.. The offerors should prepare and submit their proposal in sections aligned with and cross indexed to the evaluation criteria to facilitate government review and evaluation. Offerors should be asked to identify technical, cost, schedule, and proposal risks associated with their proposals, together with their approaches for resolving or avoiding the identified risks. The offerors should also be asked to provide past performance information and references as part of their proposal.

(5) Section M of the solicitation shall include a notice stating that unrealistically low proposed costs or prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or the offeror has made an unrealistic proposal. This includes both original submissions and BAFOs. Offerors should be advised that offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their cost realism, completeness and reasonableness and that offeror s estimates that are 1414 low may cause the offer to be eliminated from the competition (subject to the requirements of FAR 15.608 and FAR 15.610).

(6) An executive summary that briefly describes and highlights the salient aspects of the solicitation may be included as a cover sheet for the solicitation. The executive summary shall not contain any new information or requirements not already discussed in the solicitation. A DD Form 1707 may be used in lieu of an executive summary letter.

b. A Solicitation Review Process shall be established in accordance with MAJCOM procedures to thoroughly review the solicitation for consistency with law, policy, regulations, any requirement direction, the SSP and the AP. The process should ensure that the acquisition strategy, contract provisions and clauses, quantities, schedules, and data requirements are reviewed by appropriate senior contracting and technical personnel. All aspects of the solicitation should be examined to eliminate unnecessary or unduly restrictive requirements. Personnel responsible for the requirement shall ensure that the solicitation requirements will satisfy customer needs. If SSET members have been identified, they should participate in the preparation and review of the solicitation document.

BB-207 Notice of Source Selection Action. It is the responsibility of the MAJCOM to establish parameters for which source selection action notification will be made. Regardless of dollar value, all acquisitions of aircraft or efforts which have generated Congressional interest shall follow these reporting procedures. When the solicitation is released, the SSET chairperson and Contracting Officer shall ensure that a notice of source selection action in progress is forwarded to all affected Air Force Commands, SAF/AQCS, and the potential offerors. The notification will identify the requirement involved, any current contracts in that area; the anticipated period of the source selection activities; and include statements to the effect that: (1) contacts regarding, or briefings concerning, the requirement by participating offerors are not allowed; (2) the Contracting Officer is the only person authorized to contact offerors; and (3) the SSA is the only person with authority to release information regarding an ongoing source selection.

BB-14
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Part 3 - PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SOURCE SELECTION DECISION

BB-301 General. This part explains the major steps in the source selection process from receipt of initial proposals through the source selection decision including discussions with offerors. Proposals shall be evaluated in a fair, comprehensive and impartial manner.

BB-302 Offerors Oral Presentations.

a. Although oral presentations are the exception to the rule, the SSET should consider having oral presentations if the requirement is unusual or if one or more of the offerors have not been awarded contracts in the past by the acquisition activity. In these instances, oral presentations help the Government ensure that it fully understands the proposals.

b. If oral presentations are deemed appropriate:

(1) Presentations should be conducted before proposals are evaluated to provide an overview of the entire proposal before the evaluation of its specific parts;

(2) Each offeror shall be given an opportunity to make an oral presentation so that no offeror will have a competitive advantage. Every offeror who chooses to make an oral presentation shall be given the same time constraint and they shall be notified that only their written submittals, such as the proposal, responses to CR/DRs, and BAFOs will form the basis of the Government s evaluation;

(2 To ensure objectivity during the evaluation process, all Government participants in the evaluation must attend either all or none of the oral presentations; and

(3) The SSET chairperson shall ensure that minutes are taken of each oral presentation and included in the source selection file.When page limits are included in the solicitation, additional documentation may not be provided to the SSET at the oral presentation.

BB-303 Technical Evaluation. The SSET chairperson shall ensure that all elements of the evaluation are coordinated and that the evaluation report on each offeror is logical and consistent. Based upon the technical backgrounds and source selection experience of SSAT members, it may be beneficial to provide them with an evaluation guide (see attachment 4).

a. Technical as well as cost(price) proposals will be submitted to the contracting officer, who will provide technical proposals to the technical evaluators. The technical evaluation will be conducted independent of the cost(price) evaluation. Technical evaluators will not have access to cost data any time prior to the decision briefing. In this context, cost data does not include information required for types and quantities analysis such as labor hours, personnel qualifications, equipment and material lists, and other non-rate related information. Technical personnel may examine such data upon the request of the Contract Team, even if it is extracted from the cost proposal. However, they may not be given access to the complete cost proposal.

b. Technical approach and ability to meet stated minimum performance requirements are of major importance in proposal evaluation. The term technical in this context is not limited to scientific or engineering concepts or principals, but may include any performance skills .

c. The SSET technical team accomplishes a technical evaluation of each of the initial offers using the assessment criteria to analyze each proposal which match the evaluation criteria in Section M of the RFP.

d. Evaluators shall indicate the value of each proposal in relation to the evaluation standards which were established before the receipt of proposals. The SSET shall not compare the proposals against each other.

e. Evaluators must understand the requirement of the solicitation, the evaluation criteria, and the evaluation standards. Evaluators are encouraged to engage in discussions with advisors, or other SSET members when it is necessary to verify certain aspects of proposals under their review.

f. The technical evaluation results in four distinct products that are included in the Proposal Analysis Report (PAR):

(1) Proposal ratings;

(2) Proposal risk assessments;

(3) Performance risk assessment;

(4) Narrative assessments (which identify strengths and weaknesses and support ratings and risk assessments); and
(5) Recommended Deficiency Reports and Clarification Requests.

BB-304 Use of Rating Techniques.

a. After assessing the offerors data, the evaluator shall apply the rating system prescribed by the SSP and rate each proposal in relation to the evaluation standards.

b. Color ratings are used. Color ratings are mandatory at the factor and subfactor level. Colors may also be used at the element level, although symbols may be used as an alternative at these lower levels. The color rating depicts

BB-15
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

how well each offeror meets the evaluation standards. Color ratings are not summarized above the factor level. However, if the SSA requires a summary rating at the area level in the SSP, color ratings shall be used. To provide for a standard color scheme, the spectrum below shall be used (see Attachment 4 for an example). Ratings must be accompanied by a consistent narrative assessment (inclusive of strengths and weaknesses) of the basis for the rating. The definitions set forth below shall be followed any time color ratings are used. Deviations from these definitions can only be obtained by forwarding a request through SAF/AQCS.

The following ratings shall be used when evaluating essential characteristics:

Color Rating Definition
Blue Exceptional Exceeds specified performance or capability in a beneficial way to the Air Force, and has no significant weakness.

Green Acceptable Meets evaluation standards and any weaknesses are readily correctable.

Yellow Marginal Fails to meet evaluation standards; however, any significant deficiencies are correctable.

Red Unacceptable Fails to meet a minimum requirement of the RFP and the deficiency is uncorrectable without a major revision of the proposal.

The following ratings shall be used when evaluating those segments of a proposal that reflect minimum mandatory requirements:

Color Rating Definition
Green Acceptable Passes (or meets) minimum mandatory requirements.

Red Unacceptable Fails to meet minimum mandatory requirements.

c. Use of numerical weights is discouraged because it implies that the technical team can differentiate between small differences in technical merit. Such determinations may be extremely difficult to support. Therefore, numerical weighting of evaluation criterion should not be used.

d. If an offerors proposal is evaluated as unacceptable at any level of the evaluation criteria, this fact must be included in the rating and narrative assessment at that level and each higher evaluation criteria level. Therefore, a red or unacceptable rating at any level must be carried to the highest rated level.

e. Symbols may be used to indicate proposal ratings at the element level. For example, a plus (+) sign may be used to indicate that the offeror has exceeded the standard; a check (3) to indicate that the offeror has met the standard; and a minus (-) to indicate that the standard has not been met for the element evaluated.

f. The following subjects are not color rated (although they still are considered by the SSET as part of the integrated assessment):

(1) Financial capability and preaward surveys;

(2) Cost(price); and

(3) Risk.

g. Proposals are normally rated twice:

(1) Upon completion of the evaluation of the initial proposal; and

(2) At the end of discussions after BAFOs are received, if discussions are held.

NOTE: Both ratings will be maintained and submitted to the SSA.

h. When displayed graphically in briefings or reports, changes in the initial color rating shall be displayed by superimposing one or more arrows in a color block showing the new color. The number and direction of the arrows used in each block on the chart indicates the extent and direction of change, (for example, one arrow upward indicates an improvement of one color rating). Any changes from the original proposal should be identified in the discussion of strengths, weaknesses and risk and analyzed for the SSA in the PAR and SSA Briefing.

i. If a source selection has a mix of minimum mandatory requirements and essential characteristics or baseline requirements, most likely an initial competitive range will be established to exclude offerors which did not meet the minimum mandatory requirements. The minimum mandatory portion need not be color rated; however, if it is, it shall be displayed as green for meeting the requirement or red for not meeting the minimum mandatory requirement. A narrative identifying the deficiencies is sufficient. The essential characteristics or baseline requirements are usually then evaluated and color rated. This minimizes the work of the technical team by not requiring then to evalu-

BB-16
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENAFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

ate the essential characteristics or baseline requirements for offerors which did not meet the minimum mandatory requirements.

BB-305 Assessment of Risk.

a. There are two types of risk assessments. Proposal risk assessments, in which the evaluator identifies and assesses the risks associated with an offerors proposed approach as it relates to accomplishing the requirements of the solicitation. The evaluator considers such questions as whether the proposed method of performance is risky, non-standard or impractical; and performance risk assessments, in which the evaluator assesses an offeror s present and past work record to evaluate the offerors ability to successfully perform in accordance with its proposal. In assessing the overall ability of the offeror to perform, the evaluator should consult with the individual technical experts who are working on the specific solicitation requirements or proposed effort. Proposal risk assessments are always reflected in the evaluation matrix (see Attachment 5). Performance risk assessments are reflected in the matrix, except when addressed under general considerations.

(1) Use the following definitions when assessing proposal risks:

(A) HIGH (H) Likely to cause significant serious disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance even with special contractor emphasis and close government monitoring;

(B) MODERATE (M) Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance. However, special contractor emphasis and close government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties; and

(C) LOW (L) Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

(2) Use the following definitions when assessing performance risk:

(A) HIGH (H) Significant doubt exists, based on the offerors performance record, that the offeror can satisfactorily perform the proposed effort;

(B) MODERATE (M) Some doubt exists, based on the offerors performance record, that the offeror can satisfactorily perform the proposed effort;

(C) LOW (L) Little doubt exists, based on the offerors performance record, that the offeror can satisfactorily perform the proposed effort; and

(D) NOT APPLICABLE No significant performance record is identifiable. This is a neutral rating. You must rely on the rest of the proposal to evaluate this offeror.

b. Each proposal and performance risk assessment will consider the number and severity of problems, the effectiveness of corrective actions taken, and the overall work record. Consider also the offerors demonstrated ability to effectively identify and take actions to abate requirement risks. The assessment of performance risk is not intended to be a simple arithmetic function of an offeror s performance on a list of contracts. The evaluation team should place the greatest consideration on the information deemed most relevant and significant. In the cost area, more consideration should be given to efforts for similar end items and to efforts with similar contract types.
c. For unusual or complex requirements offerors may be required to submit, as a part of their proposal, a proposal risk analysis which identifies proposal risk areas and the recommended approaches to minimize the impact of those risks on the overall success of the requirement.

d. Proposal risks associated with cost, schedule, and performance or technical aspects of the requirement must be assessed. Risks may be inherent in a proposed approach by virtue of its relationship to the state of the art. Risks may occur as a result of a particular technical approach, the selection of certain materials, processes, equipment, etc., or as a result of the cost, schedule and economic impacts associated with these approaches. Risk may also occur from the impact that these will have on the offeror's ability to perform in view of its technical approach. The prime's proposed subcontract arrangements may also impact proposal risk. For instance, a proposed fixed price subcontract with an unrealistic delivery schedule can be expected to impact the overall effort and should be assessed in the proposal risk for that area or factor.

e. In evaluating proposal risks, the evaluators must consider the assessments of personnel responsible for the requirement and the offeror's assessment and make an independent judgment of the probability of success, the impact of failure, and the alternatives available to meet the requirements.

f. Proposal risk assessments shall be discussed in evaluation narratives along with strengths and weaknesses and shall be depicted in briefings with the color ratings for each

BB-17
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

factor, subfactor or element other than Cost(price) as specified in Section M of the RFP. A proposal risk assessment rating and discussion is mandatory for each subfactor at the subfactor summary level.

g. The performance risk assessment will focus on cost and specific criteria. Factor level assessments may be used. Performance risk shall also be discussed in evaluation narratives along with strengths and weaknesses and depicted in briefings.

h. The risk assessment and color rating assigned to any factor or subfactor are independent of each other. Any risk assessment rating may be used with any color rating to reflect evaluation results.

i. It is the responsibility of the technical evaluation team to ensure that the cost team is informed of the identified proposal risks and the potential cost impact. For example, the cost team should be informed if the proposed method of performance does not reflect the same level of effort identified in the manpower hours proposed.

BB-306 Deficiency Reports (DRs).

a. During the initial evaluation of proposals, the SSET must record separately and in addition to the narrative analysis, the deficiencies found in each offeror's proposal. It is important that deficiency reports be prepared at the time the deficiency is discovered. Late preparation often results in poorly substantiated reports. It is important that the evaluator document the effect the uncorrected deficiency would have on performance (see Attachment 6). The deficiency report will be provided to the Contract Team who will in turn provide the offeror with the opportunity to amend its proposal to correct the deficiency. The release of deficiency reports (which constitutes discussions) will not begin until after the initial competitive range is determined and approval to release the reports is received from the Chairperson. Award shall not be made without discussion until the SSA has reviewed the deficiencies in each offeror's proposal.

b. Examples of deficiency reports are:

(1) A proposed approach which poses an unacceptable risk;

(2) An omission of data which makes it impossible to assess compliance with the standard for that requirement;

(3) An approach taken by an offeror which is expected to yield undesirable performance; or

(4) Offeror fails to meet a minimum mandatory requirement.

c. Identified deficiencies shall be derived only from the evaluation of each offeror's proposal against evaluation standards, and then only when the proposal fails to meet the government's specified minimum level of performance or essential characteristics of the requirement. Deficiencies must not be derived from a comparative evaluation of the relative strengths and weaknesses of competing offerors' proposals.

d. The offeror's response to the deficiency report is as important as the original proposal. The Contract Team must transmit each offeror's response to the evaluation team for a technical analysis.

e. The deficiency report, which is a part of the overall PAR provided to the SSA, must address all changes which have an impact on the original proposal.

f. The deficiency report may serve as a guide for debriefing offerors after contract award.

BB-307 Clarification Requests (CRs).

a. Evaluators must identify those aspects of the proposal which require clarification. If data provided in the proposal is inadequate for evaluation or contradictory statements are found, a clarification request should be issued. Two categories of clarification requests exist:

(1) Significant clarification requests (SCRs) will specifically identify the aspect of the offeror's proposal for which clarification is required and require that discussions with offerors be opened. Whenever performance risk assessment results in a possible rating of moderate or high, CRs should be developed. Clarification requests (see Attachment 6) are sent to the Contract Team and submitted to the offerors in the same way as deficiencies. As with DRs, the SSET Chairperson will review all CRs before providing them to offerors, and before any decision is made to award without discussions; and

(2) Minor clarification requests (MCRs) are for the purpose of eliminating minor irregularities, informalities or apparent clerical mistakes. MCRs do not give the offeror an opportunity to revise or modify its proposal and do not constitute discussions. Subject to the concurrence of legal counsel, MCRs may be sent prior to the initial competitive range determination.

b. Release of any SCRs to an offeror constitutes discussions and shall not be sent before the initial competitive

BB-18
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

range determination.

BB-308 Narrative Assessments

a. Preparing the results of the evaluation in narrative form is an important aspect of the evaluation process. In preparing the written narrative, the evaluator should be aware that it will be the principal means available to the SSA to perform a comparative analysis of the offers.

b. The evaluator must indicate in the narrative, as a minimum: what is offered; whether it meets or fails to meet the evaluation standard; any strengths or weaknesses; the impact of any deficiencies; what can be done to remedy each deficiency; and a risk assessment of the offeror's proposal approach and ability to perform. Successfully prepared narratives are crisp and to the point.

BB-309 Cost(Price) Evaluation.

a. The purpose of cost(price) evaluation is to determine whether an offeror's proposed costs are realistic and complete in relation to the solicitation and the technical and management proposals, and to provide an assessment of the reasonableness of the proposed price.

(1) For the cost(price) to be realistic, it must reflect what it would cost the offeror to perform the effort, if he operates with reasonable economy and efficiency. The cost (price) should not put the offeror in a situation where, in order to earn profit, he not only must perform perfectly, but everything else on the contract must be perfect as well, including the specifications, statement of work, performance work statement, etc.. Allow room for some rework and corrections to occur- after all, in most cases, this is what really happens during contract performance.

(2) For the cost(price) data to be complete, the offeror must provide all the data that is necessary to support the offer. The amount of data needed will vary depending on the requirement. If you are using price analysis, you may only need information about the catalog price or the price at which the item has been sold in the recent past. If you are buying something that is being specially made for the Government, you may need information on the cost of raw materials, labor, scrap rates, etc.

(3) For the cost(price) to be reasonable, it must represent a reasonable compromise between the seller s and the buyer s opinions of what constitutes a fair price. Reasonable is, after all, a personal judgment that takes into account the context of a given source selection, including current market conditions and other factors that affect the ability of an offeror to perform the contract requirement. Therefore, fair and reasonable should be considered in three dimensions: fair under current market conditions, reasonable to the seller, and reasonable to the buyer.

b. In order to preclude influencing their evaluation, offerors' Cost(price) proposals shall not be made available to technical evaluators. Cost(price) evaluators, however, should discuss the details of technical proposals with the technical evaluators (and may generally discuss specific cost elements) to aid in their evaluation of costs associated with labor categories and hours, materials, and other elements of Cost(price) as appropriate. Labor hour and material breakouts may be included in technical volumes of the proposal to aid in this process. Cost(price) evaluators should also use the DCAA Audit Report and the Contract Administration Office Field Price Analysis Report, when appropriate.

c. Evaluation of the cost(price) realism of each proposal will be made without regard to any proposed ceiling on the government s obligation.

d. Consideration must be given to variations in amount of government-furnished property (GFP) requested or the use of government-owned facilities and tooling, and all other disparities before the offeror's proposal can be equitably evaluated. The evaluated costs shall be adjusted to account for these variations.

e. Price analysis is generally favored over cost analysis in source selection. Price analysis will generally be sufficient to support source selection decisions on relatively easy, simple, uncomplicated, competitive procurements. Price analysis is used to keep attention focused on value. It is best used in procurements for commercial-off-the-shelf-items, commercial services, competitive requirements, and standard parts or services.

f. The cost team will establish and maintain a cost baseline for each proposal to facilitate an understanding of the changes leading to the final cost(price). A summary of this baseline and all changes through BAFO shall be included in the PAR.

g. Following completion of the cost(price) evaluation, the SSA will be provided with the cost team s findings as to the reasonableness, completeness and realism of each offeror's proposal. If a proposal is determined to be unrealistic, incomplete, or unreasonable, the reasons for this conclusion must be stated. The SSA will also be given visibility into the build-up of the evaluated government amount for each proposal through BAFO in the cost analysis included in the PAR and presented at the decision briefing.

BB-19
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

BB-310 Establish Consensus on Strengths and Weaknesses within the Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET). After individual evaluations have been completed within a team, the strengths and weaknesses determined by individual team members are distilled into a integrated, team consensus, preferably by group discussion, to ensure that the strengths and weaknesses relate to the established standards. After achieving intrateam consensus, team leaders must reach a consensus on the factor rating. The SSET Chair person s fundamental responsibility is to ensure that the SSA briefing fairly and accurately reflects an overall evaluation of each offeror s proposal. Discussions among team chiefs (including the cost team) are a integral tool to making this a reality.

BB-311 Determination of Competitive Range.

a. When written or oral discussions are conducted, they must be conducted with all responsible offerors who submit proposals within the competitive range. The determination as to which proposals are not in the competitive range, and the exclusion of offerors either before or as a result of written or oral discussions, will be made by the Contracting Officer, subject to approval by the SSA.

b. The competitive range must be determined after evaluation of all proposals received, on the basis of cost(price), technical, and other salient factors including proposal deficiencies and their potential for correction. Before including or excluding a proposal from within the competitive range, the possibility of its selection for award should be assessed. The objective is not to eliminate proposals from the competitive range, but to facilitate competition by conducting written and oral discussions with those offerors who have a reasonable chance of being selected for an award. When there is doubt as to whether a proposal is within the competitive range, the proposal should be included (see FAR 15.609).

c. The determination of competitive range is based on informed judgment and is complex in nature. All such decisions must be completely and adequately documented for the record. A proposal may be determined outside the competitive range if:

(1) It does not reasonably address the essential requirements of the solicitation;

(2) A substantial technical drawback is apparent in the proposal and sufficient correction or improvement to consider the proposal further would require virtually an entirely new technical proposal;

(3) The proposal contains major technical or business deficiencies or omissions, or out-of-line costs, which initial or continuing discussions with the offeror could not reasonably be expected to cure. Before eliminating an offeror from the competitive range based on unrealistic costs or prices, it will be necessary, to the extent possible, and without discussions with the offeror, to determine the reason for the out-of-line costs or prices. For example, the costs might be attributable to a unique design approach, a technical breakthrough or an accelerated delivery. These may be legitimate reasons for the apparent out-of-line costs or prices; or

(4) The proposal does not meet a minimum mandatory requirement at time of BAFO.

d. Multiple competitive range determinations before BAFO are acceptable. For example, a second competitive range determination may be appropriate after responses to clarification requests and deficiency reports have been received.

e. Exclusion of an offeror from the competitive range at any time during the source selection process must be approved by the SSA (nondelegable).

f. Offerors whose proposals are determined to be outside the competitive range and with whom initial or continuing discussions are not to be conducted, must be notified promptly in accordance with FAR 15.609.

BB-312 Conducting Written or Oral Discussions.

a. Oral or written discussions with offerors shall be led only by members of the Contract Team with other SSET members support. The team will complete negotiations on all terms and conditions with all offerors determined to be within the competitive range. The team is the only point of contact between the SSET and the offerors.

b. All offerors determined to be in the competitive range shall be advised of any deficiencies in their proposals or portions of their proposals that require clarification and be given a reasonable opportunity to correct or resolve the deficiencies and to provide clarifications. Note that deficiencies need only be brought to the offeror s attention once and failure of the offeror to correct the deficiency after such notice does not require further Government action. Offerors may submit cost(price), technical, or other proposal revisions as a result of the discussions.

c. Discussions with each offeror must be confined exclusively to that offeror s proposal. Discussions must be conducted in a way that scrupulously avoids disclosure of the relative strengths and weaknesses of competing offerors,

BB-20
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

technical information or ideas, or cost (price) data from any other offeror s proposal. Discussions should:

(1) Ensure that the offerors clearly understand the objective of the acquisition and the government requirement;

(2) Ensure that the Air Force evaluators clearly understand the offeror s proposal; and;

(3) Explore areas of deficiency or those requiring clarification (including significant weaknesses) in the offeror s proposal.

d. At the conclusion of written or oral discussions, a final common cutoff date which allows a reasonable opportunity for submission of Best and Final Offers must be established and all remaining participants notified in writing. The notifications shall:

(1) State that discussions have been concluded and specify the date, time, and location BAFOs must be received;

(2) Advise the offerors that any BAFO received after the final cutoff will be a late modification in accordance with FAR 15.412 and paragraph (c) of the clause at FAR 52.215-10, Late Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Proposals;

(3) Advise the offerors that if a BAFO is not received prior to the common cutoff for an offeror, that offeror s current proposal, reflecting any clarifications or revisions to date will be evaluated as its best and final offer; and

(4) Caution the offerors against buying-in and submitting unsupported changes to their prior offers.

e. Contracting Officers shall not call for BAFOs more than once unless fully justified and approved in accordance with DFARS 215.611 and AFFARS 5315.611.

f. All proposal revisions and information provided by the offerors during the conduct of discussions and received prior to the common cutoff will be considered in the final source selection decision, unless a technical page limitation has been exceeded.

BB-313 The Proposal Analysis Report (PAR)

a. The final Technical Team and Contracting Team reports (less cost data) will be used by the entire SSET for preparation of a PAR (See Attachment 7). The SSET, under the guidance of the chairperson, shall prepare a PAR summarizing the strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each proposal and their resultant ratings (color coded or narrative). This summary, together with the Technical Team report and the Contracting Team report, will be sent to the SSA for the final source selection decision.

b. The PAR shall include the following:

(1) A narrative assessment of the technical evaluation. Narrative assessments shall be provided at the factor summary level and may include lower levels as necessary. Each factor assessment must be precise, identify the color rating, performance risk (if used), and proposal risk. It will highlight the significant strengths and weaknesses of each evaluated aspect of the proposal. (See Attachment 4 for an example of graphically displaying matrix information);

(2) An analysis of the offeror s Cost(price) (prepared by the Contracting Team);

(3) Results of evaluating contractual considerations and any other general considerations that were evaluated by the SSET; and

(4) An overall performance assessment.

c. The objective of the PAR is to present a summary of the evaluation of each proposal against solicitation requirements based on established evaluation criteria and evaluation standards and provide an analysis of relevant information resulting from the evaluation of proposals and other considerations to support a final selection decision by the SSA. As a minimum, the information described in Attachment 7 shall be included in every PAR.

d. The PAR encompasses information derived from the results of the evaluation of the proposals as well as the results of final discussions, BAFO, and other considerations. It is an official record of the evaluation of proposals and supporting rationale. A cost evaluation summary track shall be provided from initial proposals through BAFO.

e. The Contracting Officer shall advise the SSA when the responsibility of any offeror is questioned. The PAR shall include this information.

f. Note that an audit trail from the highest to the lowest levels of the evaluation shall be provided by the supporting reports and documentation.

BB-314 Source Selection Briefings. The SSET Chairperson is responsible for having the results of the evaluation briefed to the SSA. The recipients and the scope of the briefings depend on the organizational level at which

BB-21
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

the SSA has been established. All in attendance must complete a certification (see Attachment 10) in which they agree to safeguard source selection information (see paragraph BB-403). When appropriate, the SSA may waive the requirement for a formal briefing and utilize the PAR during discussions with the SSET.

BB-315 Selection and Contract Award. Based on SSA direction and guidance, the SSET chairperson is responsible for preparing the Source Selection Decision Document for the SSA s signature. The assigned legal advisor and the senior contracting advisor shall coordinate on the Source Selection Decision Document. If the Source Selection Decision Document contains proprietary or source selection information, it shall be marked accordingly. The SSA s signature on the decision document is authority for the Contracting Officer to award a contract to the selected offeror(s) subject to the necessary administrative approvals. This document contains:

a. The source selection decision;

b. Clear rationale for the source selection decision. When award is made on a best value basis, the SSA should make a specific determination that the superiority of the higher priced proposal warrants the additional cost involved. Merely stating a proposals superiority is not acceptable. The cost/technical trade-off must indicate the value to the Government associated with the added costs and justify why it is in the Governments interest to expend additional funds, regardless of the superiority of the technical rating; and

c. Direction to accomplish award of a contract.

NOTES:

(1) This is a releasable document under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

(2) An example of the format of a Source Selection Decision Document is at Attachment 8. The attachment provides a
format only. The actual decision document must include a detailed discussion of the rationale for each source selected.

BB-316 Announcement of Source Selection Decision. The SSA shall ensure that:

a. Advance information of the decision is provided as may be required in the delegation of source selection authority;

b. For contract awards over $5 million, information needed for Congressional Announcement is provided to SAF/LLP at the preestablished time (see 5305.303); and

c. Information needed for press releases is provided to the local Office of Public Affairs at the preestablished time.

BB-22
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

BB-317 Notification and Debriefings.

a. Notifications. The Contracting Officer shall notify unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.1001.

b. Debriefings. Debriefings shall be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.1003. Comparisons shall not be made to other unsuccessful offerors proposals:

(1) Debriefings will be with only one offeror at a time and will not be conducted until after contract award;

(2) The debriefing shall be confined to a discussion of the offerors proposal, its strong and weak points in relation to the requirements of the solicitation and government risk assessments and top-level information on the winning offeror (See policy letter in AFAC 92-34);

(3) Debriefings will be conducted promptly (see policy letter in AFAC 92-34). When discussions were held, any weaknesses discussed during the debriefing should have already been discussed with the offeror in the form of a CR or a DR with the exception of weaknesses identified as a result of the BAFO response. The strengths and weaknesses identified in the debriefing should parallel those identified and documented by the SSET;

(4) Debriefings can be conducted orally (either face-to-face or by telephone) or in writing. A formal briefing (charts and script) will be prepared, coordinated with legal counsel, contracting staff, and approval by the SSET chairperson. A copy of the briefing charts and script will be provided to the offeror on request. The offeror should be encouraged to submit written questions in advance. If written questions are received, every effort should be made to either incorporate answers into the debriefing charts and script or provide written answers at the time of the debriefings;

(5) The contracting officer shall chair the debriefing session. The individuals actually responsible for the evaluations, such as the SSET chairperson and evaluators shall provide the specific evaluation results. Open discussions are permitted on any aspect of the debriefings, including answers to written questions. Discussions regarding the validity of either the requirement or the evaluation process shall be avoided;

(6) Offerors may ask oral questions during debriefings in addition to written questions submitted prior to the debriefing. Government personnel shall attempt to answer all questions. However, the debriefing team should caucus before providing answers to any questions not provided in advance which are complex, unclear, or may potentially lead to the release of proprietary or classified information. All answers provided must be consistent with the information presented to the SSA and correspond to the areas evaluated during source selection. Occasionally, it may be necessary to provide the offeror with a written response after the debriefing. A written record of the debriefing presentation shall be made part of the official source selection file. A written summary of all questions and answers shall also be retained in the source selection file, and may be provided to the offeror; and

(7) A written debriefing may be conducted by providing the unsuccessful or successful offeror with copies of the source selection decision document and those portions of the PAR that relate to the offeror s proposal. The contracting officer may then permit the offeror to submit written questions. When written questions are permitted, they shall be answered promptly.

BB-318 Lessons Learned. Following contract award, personnel responsible for the requirement shall determine if publishing a Lessons Learned report would benefit the source selection process. These reports should contain no source selection or proprietary information, no reference to the specific requirement involved, and be limited to pertinent issues that may be beneficial to future source selection actions and planning. The report (if prepared) should be provided to SAF/AQCS through the MAJCOM within 8 weeks after the source selection decision is announced, if issues addressed have impact outside the MAJCOM.

BB-319 Security Requirements. The SSET shall develop security procedures covering the entire source selection process. i.e., locking containers, safes for classified, personnel clearances when required, telephone usage, storage, and disposal of source selection generated data which include proposals.

BB-23
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-24
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Part 4 - SOURCE SELECTION DOCUMENTATION AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION

BB-401 General. This part provides guidance on the treatment of source selection documentation and the release of source selection information.

a. FAR section 3.104, Procurement Integrity, implements Section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 423) as amended by subsequent National Defense Authorization Acts.

b. FAR subpart 4.8 prescribes requirements for establishing, maintaining, and disposing of contract files, including source selection related documentation.

c. DoDD 5500.7, Standards of Conduct, sets forth standards of conduct for Air Force personnel, including circumstances relating to business relationships.

BB-402 Source Selection Records.

a. Source selection records are any records relative to the source selection. However, not all source selection records contain source selection sensitive information. and other documents that have a direct relationship to the source selection. Source selection records containing source selection sensitive information must be protected and appropriately marked in accordance with FAR 3.104. Instructions for protecting source selection information are provided in paragraph BB-403, below. Source selection records usually include, but are not limited to, the following documents:

(1) Any directions from higher headquarters regarding the requirement;

(2) If held, Acquisition Strategy Panel presentations (view graphs and text) and minutes;

(3) Source list screening criteria and the results of the screening, including justification(s) for not issuing a solicitation to specific sources;

(4) The approved Source Selection Plan;

(5) SSA delegation request and SSET Chairperson nomination request;

(6) Evaluation standards;

*(7) Colors assigned to the evaluation criteria ;

(8) All written orders or other written documentation formally establishing SSET members, and amendments thereto;

(9) Messages and other notices notifying SSET and other source selection personnel of meetings;

(10) Record of attendance and a summary of proceedings of any preproposal conference;

(11) Request for Proposal (releasable under FOIA);

*(12) All proposals and amendments or alternative proposals submitted by each offeror, including a summary of any oral presentation made directly to the SSET;

*(13) Evaluation reports including Narrative Assessments and Cost(Price) Analysis;

*(14) Deficiency Reports, Clarification Requests, and offerors responses;

*(15) Any correspondence sent to offerors by the SSET during the evaluation, and responses thereto;

*(16) Company-specific past performance information;

(17) All performance data and documentation used to arrive at performance risk assessment;

*(18) The PAR;
*(19) All source selection presentations (view graphs and text);

(20) Source Selection Decision Document;

(21) Lessons learned report;

(22) Records of attendance at source selection decision briefings;

(23) Schedules of source selection meetings; and

(24) Source Selection Information Briefing Certificates (see Attachment 10).

* Normally will require continued protection after contract award.

b. Source selection sensitive documents are separate and distinct from the official contract file. As such, they are protected separately from the official contract file. The establishment of source selection records does not eliminate the requirements for maintaining official contract files required by FAR Subpart 4.8. It is always necessary to pro-

BB-25
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

tect source selection sensitive records to prevent unauthorized access or release to the public. Because there are separate tables and rules for each category in AFI 37-122, Air Force Records Management Program, the location of all documents shall be noted by use of a cross-reference index in the official contract file.

BB-403 Protecting Source Selection Records.

a. In order to maintain the effectiveness and integrity of the source selection process, all information related to the source selection must be handled with the utmost discretion to avoid any compromise.

b. While the source selection is in process, disclosure of source selection information is the exclusive responsibility of the SSA and the contracting officer (see FAR 3.104). After contract award, this authority is vested in the responsible PEO, DAC, or Contracting Activity Commander for the specific contract or records involved. The responsible official may delegate authority to grant access; but, authority to release source selection information is nondelegable. Requests for access to or release of source selection information and the authorizations granting access or release must be in writing.

(1) Access is defined as receiving a source selection record or the information in a source selection record, or being permitted to view a source selection record; if the record is not physically retained by the requester.

(2) Release is defined as permitting a copy of a source selection document to be physically retained by the requester.

c. In addition to the marking requirements of FAR 3.104, source selection information must also be protected and marked For Official Use Only (FOUO) . The cover sheet format in Attachment 9 may be reproduced and used as appropriate. The cover sheet should be printed on yellow paper when available. Classified source selection documents must also be marked and protected as required by DODI 5200.1-R/AFPD 31-4, Information Security Program.

d. All persons involved in the source selection process (including non-government advisors and administrative personnel) will be required to execute a Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate before they are given access to source selection information. The SSET chairperson shall ensure that the certificates from all source selection team members, including SSET members, are collected and filed with the source selection records. (See Attachment 10 for the certificate format.)

(1) Only individuals who have a strict need-to-know and have signed the proper certification may have access to source selection information. Need-to-know must be clearly established before any individual or activity is afforded access to or release of source selection information while the source selection is in process or for a specific record after contract award.

(2) Under no circumstance will any advisor or member of the SSET or any other person having access to source selection information discuss the proceedings with any individual not a member of the source selection organization, except as authorized under this appendix.

(3) Any unauthorized disclosure or release of source selection information will be investigated and, as appropriate, treated under disciplinary procedures authorized by law or administrative procedures.

e. Access to source selection sensitive information must be strictly controlled at all organizational levels. Access does not extend to other individuals in the organizational chain of command of the individuals who are involved in the source selection.

(1) If the SSA desires to provide information to persons at higher organizational levels, each of those individuals must complete the certificate (see Attachment 10) and send it to the Contracting Officer to include in the source selection records.

(2) At the MAJCOM level, the MAJCOM Chief of Contracting is responsible for controlling access to source selection information.

f. When source selection information falls within the categories of materials that may be withheld from public disclosure (for example the PAR), each document or portion thereof must have an independent basis for exemption.

(1) Any questions regarding public disclosure of information should be considered on a case-by-case basis and should be referred to the appropriate Freedom of Information Act advisors.

(2) Documents that would otherwise be exempt from disclosure may be subject to disclosure when incorporated by reference in a nonexempt document (i.e., when a source selection document is incorporated by reference in the resulting contract). Such data normally is releasable following contract award unless there is a compelling reason to deny release (i.e. if it contains classified information).

BB-26
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

g. When a protest, before or after contract award, has been lodged to the General Accounting Office (GAO), General Services Board of Contract Appeals (GSBCA), or other level in which the Secretariat or HQ USAF is involved, any and all pertinent source selection documents shall be forwarded to SAF/AQCX in accordance with AFFARS 5333.1.

h. Requests for source selection information by Congress or the General Accounting Office (GAO) will be processed under AFPD 90-21/AFI 90-201, Air Force Relations With Congress, and AFI 65-401, Air Force Relations with General Accounting Office (GAO). These activities must be informed of the restriction against public disclosure of confidential or proprietary information provided by offerors. DOD and Air Force activities, such as the Inspector General (IG), auditor, and other specially appointed activities must also obtain written authority for access or release in accordance with this appendix.

BB-27
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-28
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 1--SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION

SSA ORGANIZATION EXAMPLE:

SOURCE
SELECTION ADVISORS
AUTHORITY (SSA)

SOURCE SELECTION
EVALUATION TEAM (SSET)

C T*
O T E T
N E C E
T A H A
R M N M
A I
C C
T A
L

*"TECHNICAL" refers to teams or panels necessary to evaluate the proposal using specific criterion other than cost (price) or contract definitization. Examples might be Engineering, Logistics, Management, Testing, etc.

BB-29
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-30
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

1. Receive complete Purchase Request Package.

2. Personnel responsible for the requirement and contracting personnel jointly develop the proposed acquisition strategy.

3. Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP) convened (if used); SSA delegation is discussed.

4. The Contracting Officer places a sources sought synopsis in the Commerce Business Daily (if applicable).

5. Prepare Acquisition Plan (if applicable).

6. SSA appointed.

7. SSET Chairperson appointed and SSET members designated in writing.

8. SSA and SSET members briefed on source selection duties and responsibilities and source selection certificates signed. (See Attachment 10)

9. SOW or PWS, Standards, and Evaluation criteria written and assessed for completeness, compatibility
and feasibility.

10. SSET Chairperson (may be delegated), in conjunction with the Contracting Officer prepares the Source Selection Plan.

11. The Source Selection Plan is submitted to the SSA.

12*. The SSA approves the Source Selection Plan. (Must be prior to RFP release.)

13. The Contracting Officer prepares the solicitation.

14. The local Contract Review Committee reviews the solicitation. (The Contract Review Committee member must sign a source selection certificate if the RFP review contains source selection information.)

15. The contracting officer provides a preproposal briefing to prospective offerors, if applicable. (May occur after RFP release.)

16 Solicitation release.

17*. Proposals received and checked for compliance with any stated criteria, such as page count evaluation starts.

18. Team members evaluate proposals against the standards and evaluation criteria as stated in Section L and M of the RFP. Each team member evaluates all proposals.
19*. SSET members prepare Deficiency Reports and Clarification Reports and determine initial color rating. Initial evaluations completed.

20*. Competitive range determination and SSET initial evaluation briefing provided to SSA.

21*. Release of Deficiency Reports and Clarification Requests to each offeror determined to be in the competitive range.

22*. Response to Deficiency Reports and Clarification Requests received and evaluated by SSET members.

23*. Discussions completed with all remaining offerors.

24. Business clearance, legal review, and request for BAFO released (if appropriate).

25*. Receipt and evaluation of Best and Final Offers (BAFOs).

26. SSET analysis completed and Proposal Analysis Report (PAR) prepared.

27. Decision briefing given to SSA.

28. SSA decision.

29. SSA Decision Document and updated PAR signed by SSA.

30. Contracting Officer prepares the contract(s) and all contract review committee and legal reviews, etc., are completed, i.e., contract clearance.

31. SSA announces award, including the following simultaneous actions:

Inform higher headquarters, if required by SSA delegation;
- Congressional Announcement (if applicable);

- Contract Award; and

- Notification to Unsuccessful Offerors.

32. Debriefings to offerors, upon their request.

33. Post Award or Preperformance briefing to successful offeror.

34. Lesson Learned report (if prepared) submitted IAW MAJCOM guidance.

35. SSET close-out and team members debriefed. Debriefing Certificates signed. SSET close-out include disposition of documents, i.e., disposal, contract files, or source selection information to secure storage.

BB-31
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-32
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 3--SAMPLE SOURCE SELECTION PLAN

SOURCE SELECTION PLAN

FOR

(Enter Title of Effort)

APPROVED DATE

SSA _________________ ___________

COORDINATION

SSET Chairperson _________________ ___________

Project Officer _________________ ___________

Local Director of Contracting _________________ ___________

PCO _________________ ___________

Contract Review Committee _________________ ___________

Pricing _________________ ___________

JA _________________ ___________

(Enter anyone _________________ ___________
else desired. Remove
unwanted lines) _________________ ___________

_________________ ___________

_________________ ___________
BB-33
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-34
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 3--SAMPLE SOURCE SELECTION PLAN (Cont.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page No.

1. INTRODUCTION

2. SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION

3. SOURCE LIST SCREENING PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA

4. SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

5. EVALUATION CRITERIA

6. EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7. ACQUISITION STRATEGY

BB-35
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-36
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 3 SAMPLE SOURCE SELECTION PLAN (Cont.)

1. INTRODUCTION

(Enter a program or project overview and a description of the requirement. Include the total contract dollars, including any options, and period of performance. The introduction must be consistent with the Acquisition Plan and the Acquisition Strategy Panel findings.)

2. SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION

The source selection organization consists of the Source Selection Authority (SSA) and a Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET). Special Orders, signed by the SSA, will be initiated which will establish and identify the SSET members. All members will devote their time to the source selection as the first order of business on a full-time basis, with normal day-to-day work and TDY secondary. See the organization chart, at Figure 1 on page X, for a list of participants and their assigned positions.

3. SOURCE LIST SCREENING PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA (Optional for Complex Acquisitions)

(a) Screening Procedures

(1) Screening of potential sources has been accomplished to ensure that adequate competition is obtained while limiting the potential number of proposals to be submitted to those contractors having the necessary qualifications to accomplish the contract. The screening process precludes encouragement of prospective sources which are considered incapable of satisfying the Government s total requirements.

(2) The screening criteria listed below were contained in the Sources Sought Synopsis published in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) on (Enter date). Those respondents to the synopsis meeting the screening criteria are considered potential sources for this acquisition. Those respondents not meeting the screening criteria will be so notified by the PCO. All respondents to the sources sought synopsis will be provided a copy of the RFP and if a non-qualified firm then submits a proposal, it will be evaluated without prejudice.

(b) Screening Criteria

To be deemed qualified, prospective sources must demonstrate the following:

(Enter the screening criteria listed in the CBD synopsis)

(Enter a list of potential sources)

4. SCHEDULE OF EVENTS: The schedule for this source selection is presented below:

Sources Sought Synopsis Published DA MON YR
Acquisition Strategy Panel Held DA MON YR
Acquisition Plan Approved DA MON YR
Source Selection Plan Approved DA MON YR
RFP Release Briefing DA MON YR
Receive Proposals DA MON YR
Initial Evaluations Complete DA MON YR
Competitive Range Briefing DA MON YR
Issue CRs/DRs DA MON YR
Discussions Complete DA MON YR
Receive BAFO DA MON YR
Decision Briefing DA MON YR
Contract Award DA MON YR
(Period of Performance) DA MON YR

5. EVALUATION CRITERIA

The evaluation criteria are as follows:

(Insert Section M, Evaluation Criteria, from the RFP.)

BB-37
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 3 SAMPLE SOURCE SELECTION PLAN (Cont.)

6. EVALUATION PROCEDURES

The evaluation methods and procedures will conform to AFFARS Appendix BB and Supplements. The selection of the successful contractor will be made by the SSA, based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation criteria established in Section M of the RFP as follows:

(Insert description of evaluation approach and ranking of criteria.)

7. ACQUISITION STRATEGY

Insert a discussion regarding ASP recommendations, number of contracts to be issued, contract type and rationale therefore, and a discussion of any draft RFPs issued and results thereof.

BB-38
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide

(May be tailored to fit complexity of the acquisition or
eliminated if other structured evaluation approach is used)

SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION GUIDE

FOR

(Enter Title of Effort)

I have reviewed this document for accuracy and completeness and agree with the proposed Source Selection Evaluation Guide.

______________________________________________
PCO

______________________________________________
PROJECT OFFICER

____________________________________________
SOURCE SELECTION OFFICER

I approve this Source Selection Evaluation Guide.

_____________________________________________
SSET CHAIRPERSON

BB-39
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-40
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Abbreviations

1. INTRODUCTION
a. General
b. Responsibility

2. SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION
a. Organization
b. Description of Responsibilities

3. SECURITY
a. General
b. Management
c. Procedure
d. SSET Personnel Duties
e. Office Security Manager Duties
f. Accountable Officer Duties
g. Certifications

4. ADMINISTRATION
a. General
b. Evaluation Area
c. Proposal Control
d. Classified Material
e. Working Hours
f. Schedule of Events

5. EVALUATION PROCEDURES
a. General
b. Proposal Evaluation
c. Presenting the Evaluation Results
d. Discussions/Negotiations
e. Best and Final Offer
f. Final Evaluation and Decision

6. EVALUATION CRITERIA/STANDARDS
a. Structure of Proposals
b. Evaluation Criteria
c. Evaluation Standards

7. BRIEFINGS/REPORTS/DECISION DOCUMENT
a. Briefings
b. Reports
c. Decision Document

BB-41
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-42
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

List of Abbreviations

(Add any others that apply to your source selection)

ACO.........................Administrative Contracting Officer

AO..........................Accountable Officer

BAFO........................Best and Final Offer

CR/DR.......................Clarification Request/Deficiency Report

DCAA........................Defense Contract Audit Agency

FOUO........................For Official Use Only

GFP.........................Government Furnished Property

OSM.........................Office Security Manager

PCO.........................Procuring Contracting Officer

PPI.........................Proposal Preparation Instructions

RFP.........................Request for Proposal

SSA.........................Source Selection Authority

SSB.........................Source Selection Board

SSET........................Source Selection Evaluation Team

SSEG........................Source Selection Evaluation Guide

SSO.........................Source Selection Officer

SSP.........................Source Selection Plan

BB-43
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-44
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4-- Sample SOurce Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

EVALUATION GUIDE

1. INTRODUCTION

(a) General: This guide is prepared for personnel selected to evaluate offeror proposals in a negotiated competitive acquisition. It is also for use by Government Advisors involved in the source selection process. The SSET Chairperson will also use this guide to manage the evaluation effort and to control the quality, integrity, and comprehensiveness of the process.

(b) Responsibility: This guide cites many of the responsibilities of the SSET. Each evaluation input will help prepare the foundation for the total assessment of the individual offerors. It is therefore important that inputs be professional, concise, unbiased, and based on the criteria and standards provided. Even though the evaluation is being performed on a schedule, quality is more important than schedule. Under no circumstances will anyone be excused from the board until authorized by the SSET Chairperson. Advisors may be recalled for assessment of offeror responses to CR/DRs issued by the contracting officer. At all times, the team members, and advisors will be responsive to the requirements of the SSET chairperson, and utilize the forms, formats, and procedures contained herein.

2. SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION
(NOTE: This section must be the same as the SSP)

(a) Organization:

The source selection organization consists of the Source Selection Authority (SSA) and a Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET). Special Orders, signed by the SSA, will be initiated which will establish the Source Selection Board (SSB) and identify the Government board members. All board members will devote their time to the SSB as the first order of business on a full-time basis, with normal day-to-day work and TDY secondary. See the organization chart, at Figure 1 on page 4, for a list of participants and their assigned positions.

(b) Description of Responsibilities:

(1) The SSA is responsible for making the Source Selection decision and for the overall conduct of the Source Selection, as well as, approving, in writing, the appointment of the source selection evaluation personnel and chairperson, reviewing and approving, in writing, the SSP, authorizing release of the solicitation, approving the Contracting Officers determination to exclude offerors from the competitive range, requesting approval from (enter SAF/AQ if an executive program) in all cases where it is necessary for the Contracting Officer to reiterate a call for BAFO, and documentation of the selection rationale.

(2) The SSA Advisors are Government personnel at staff level. Their responsibilities are to providing source selection procedural advice to the SSA and the SSET, and attend all dry run and formal briefings to the SSA. SSA Advisors will not determine strengths and weaknesses, establish initial or final assessments of risks, or actually rate or rank offeror s proposals.

(3) The SSET consists of a SSET Chairperson, Contract Team, Technical Team, Performance Risk Analysis Group (PRAG) (optional), SSA Advisors, Government Advisors, and a Recorder. The SSET will evaluate proposals, prepare a comparative analysis of the evaluations, and prepare a Proposal Analysis Report (PAR) summarizing the strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each proposal and their resultant ratings. Each SSET component s (SSA Advisors responsibilities are as stated above) responsibilities are as follows:

(i) The SSET Chairpersons responsibilities are to prepare a SSP, prepare, review and approve a SSEG which contain the proposal evaluation standards, review the solicitation prior to RFP release, conduct an orientation briefing for all board members, review the Contract and Technical Teams assessments of the offerors proposal, review assessments of performance risk, prepare the PAR, and prepare, in conjunction with the PCO, the Source Selection Decision Document.

(ii) The Contract Teams responsibilities are to coordinate the development of the solicitation, conduct preproposal briefings, prepare a cost (price) analysis of the offerors proposals, conduct negotiations or discussions, evaluate all other contracting factors such as offerors contract terms and conditions, and preaward surveys, contract definitization, and debrief unsuccessful offerors. The Team Chief, who is the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), is responsible for reading all proposals, issuing DRs and CRs, conducting all written and oral discussions, and making the competitive range determination (with the approval of the SSA). The Price Analyst is responsible for ensuring that costs relate to the proposed work; assessing the associated cost risk by evaluating the probability of experiencing future cost variances from those proposed;

BB-45
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

ensuring use of independent cost estimates and the concept of most probable cost in assessing the realism of cost proposals; and calculating most probable cost to the Government using the technical risks identified by the Technical Team. The Contract Team will prepare a report which includes the cost or price analysis to be used by the SSET for preparation of the PAR.

(iii) The Technical Teams responsibilities are to establish the basis for technical evaluation of proposals, develop evaluation criteria, establish the relative order of importance of the criteria and provide this to the Contract Team for inclusion in the solicitation. After receipt of proposals, the Technical Team will rate the Technical areas, items, and factors of the proposal, identify and prepare proposal Deficiency Reports (DRs) and/or Clarification Requests (CRs), and prepare narratives for technical evaluation reports. The Technical Team will also ensure that the Contract Team Price Analyst is informed of the risk areas and GFP impact, and assist the Price Analyst in arriving at a judgment of the cost impact which may result thereby arriving at a most probable cost for an offerors total effort.

In support of the Contract Team Price Analysts efforts to generate a most probable cost determination for each offeror, the Technical Team will submit manpower evaluations immediately preceding both competitive range and decision briefings. The Technical Teams manpower evaluations of offerors proposals will be compared to the program office estimate of the manpower required for each major task in the SOW. The Technical Team will prepare a written report documenting the results of the evaluation of the proposals against the standards to be used by the SSET for preparation of the PAR. The final function of the SSET will be to prepare a lessons learned report for submission to the SSO.

(iv) If used, the PRAGs responsibilities are to conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of performance data provided by offerors, and obtained from other sources, to determine how closely the work performed relates to the evaluation areas and items to be assessed. They will confirm past and present performance identified by the offerors in the proposals, obtain additional past and present performance data, rate past and present performance, assess performance risk with respect to evaluation areas and items, brief the results of the PRAG evaluation, prepare appropriate documentation of PRAG analysis for use by the SSET for preparing the PAR, and provide consultations on performance risk assessments, as required by the SSA.

(v) The Government Advisors responsibilities are to objectively review offerors proposals in a particular functional area and providing comments and recommendations to the SSET. They will not determine strengths and weaknesses, establish initial or final assessments of risks, or actually rate or rank offerors proposals.

(vi) The Recorders responsibilities as the Administrative Officer for the SSET are to support all dry run and formal meetings of the SSET and briefings to the SSA, prepare and distribute Special Orders for the establishment and dissolution of the source selection board, performing normal security duties as the Office Security Manager, accounting for all certifications, ensuring typing support, forms, and supplies are available, maintaining logs, and controls the files, the proposals, the documentation, and the status of completion of evaluations, assisting the PCO in receiving, marking, and breaking down proposals, preparing briefing charts, and preparing a lessons learned report for the SSET Chairpersons signature.

SOURCE SELECTION ORGANIZATION

(Insert wiring diagram here)

NOTE: Remove this statement prior to printing. Include on the organization chart the names of individuals for each of the following: SSA, SSET Chairperson and Vice Chairperson, Technical Team, Contract Team, PRAG Team, Government Advisors, and the Recorder. Where advisors names are not known include number of individuals. Include office symbols only for the SSA Advisors.

3. SECURITY

(a) General: The security of the evaluation procedures is of extreme importance. The disclosure of the proceedings, evaluation results, or proposal information can result in special appeals or protests that could delay the program and embarrass the Air Force, not only in the selection under consideration, but also in future Air Force dealings with industry. The unauthorized disclosure of evaluation or proposal information will be investigated, and violations will be processed in accordance with applicable Air Force regulations.

Since classified documents are sometimes involved in source selections, and since all source selection information is handled as For Official Use Only (FOUO) material, all SSET participants are required to certify their familiarity with security regulations. DoDD 5000.7 is also included

BB-46
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

in the certification because of contractor involvement in the process.

(b) Management: Internal security for the source selection area will be carried out by the Recorder. The Recorder will also be the Accountable Officer (AO) and Office Security Manager (OSM) for all classified material.

(c) Procedure: Source selection personnel other than the PCO or respective buyer will not discuss contractual matters such as PPI status, proposals, number or identity of offerors, discussions, negotiations, and award of contracts with prospective offerors.

(d) SSET Personnel Duties: All information contained in the proposals or pertaining to the source selection process is sensitive. During the period between the receipt of proposals and notification by the PCO that an award has been made, all SSET personnel (including advisors) will ensure that:

(1) Details of the acquisition activities are not made known, wholly or in part, to anyone other than authorized personnel.

(2) Any attempt by an offeror to alter a technical proposal already submitted will be referred to the PCO.

(3) No information will be provided to an individual offeror which may improve his position to the disadvantage of a competitor.

(4) There is no discussion of any aspect of the selection activity outside the source selection area.

(5) Briefcases, folders, purses, etc., will not be brought into the source selection area, but will be left at the entrance with the Recorder.

(6) Materials will not be removed from the source selection
area except with the permission of the SSET Chairperson or a designee.

(7) There will be at least two people present at all times in the source selection area during SSET activities, and one of those must be the Recorder or his/her alternate.

(8) All waste paper containing proposal or evaluation notes or data will be disposed of as classified waste in containers so identified in the evaluation area.

(9) All classified material is handled in accordance with applicable regulations and DD Form 254.

(10) Unclassified documents, records, and reports associated with the selection process will be designated Source Selection Sensitive, For Official Use Only, Source Selection Information--See FAR 3.104, and will be handled pursuant to DoDI 5200.1-R/AFPD 31-4, Information Security Program.

(e) Office Security Manager (OSM) Duties: The OSM is required to perform the following duties:

(1) Verify that all SSET members have clearances commensurate with the highest classification of material processed by the SSET.

(2) Conduct a security briefing for all SSET participants prior to the initiation of evaluations.

(3) Monitor classified documents to ensure proper protection.

(4) Securely attach to the outside top of each classified container the Standard Form 702, Security Container Check Sheet, and annotate same daily.

(5) Check all working areas and classified storage containers as required to ensure that all classified material is secure. The following are detail procedures (duties):

(i) Each container of SSET material will be secured and checked daily, and, if a classified container, annotated by the user.

(ii) The OSM or his designee will double check and annotate the AF Form 702 and AF Form 701.

(6) Furnish security advice and guidance to source selection activity personnel.

(7) Recommend to the SSET Chairperson ways that status of security may be improved.

(f) Accountable Officer Duties: The AO is required to perform the following duties:

(1) Control accountable Secret and accountable Confidential material within the SSET.

(2) Supervise the receipt, transmittal, and destruction of classified material or supervision thereof.

BB-47
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

(3) Set new combinations for each container used for the storage of classified material.

(4) Record and file combinations of all security containers used by the SSET. Record the names of those members having knowledge of the combinations. AF Form 502, Persons Responsible for Safe, will be used for this purpose.

(5) Periodically conduct review of classified material as needed to assure control.

(6) Conduct a final review of all classified material upon termination of the selection proceedings.

(7) Dispose of all excess classified material upon final adjournment of the SSET.

(8) Pursuant to normal security regulations, reset combinations of classified storage containers prior to turnin.

(g) Certifications: Three certifications are required of all SSET members. These certifications are (1) Security, (2) Conflict of Interest, and (3) Disclosure. The completed forms are retained in the SSET files by the Recorder.

(1) Security: All participants certify they have read and understand AFPD 31-4 as supplemented.

(2) Conflict of Interest: All participants will certify that they do not possess or control any financial or other interest in the competing offerors. Where a possible conflict of interest exists, the participant will reveal the details in confidence to the SSET Chairperson for a determination in conjunction with JA. If a conflict or the possible appearance of one exists, the participant will be excused from the SSET. Where no conflict is determined to exist, the participant is so informed.

(3) Disclosures: All information concerning action of the SSET, including its membership, is Source Selection Sensitive, For Official Use Only, Source Selection InformationSee FAR 3.104. the contracting office, the requiring agency and their HQ as applicable, and/or HQ USAF will be informed by the SSET via a letter or message that a source selection is in progress and that individuals are not to discuss the acquisition with contractors. Participants are not to relate SSET information to their superiors unless their superiors are official members of, or advisors to, the SSET. The chain of command does not exist during the source selection process. Discussion of proposals, evaluations, or assessments must be confined to the areas designated for evaluation, deliberations, and official meetings. Even after a selection/award has been made, discussion of successful or unsuccessful proposals, or any evaluation thereof, is not permitted. This restriction continues until the file is destroyed, which is typically six years after completion of the contract. However, after an award has been made, this does not restrict the program office from providing support personnel with information on the winner that is needed to carry out their responsibilities.

4. ADMINISTRATION

(a) General: As indicated elsewhere, the conduct, management, and completion of the evaluation process is the responsibility of the SSET Technical Team Chief. While this is true, a substantial amount of cooperation from participants is necessary for timely and thorough accomplishment of evaluations.

(b) Evaluation Area: The evaluation area will be in (room #, bldg #). The Recorder will be given a tour of the room and given the room key one week prior to proposal receipt to prepare the room. The files will be concentrated in one area of the room. Chairs and tables will be arranged so as to be conducive to undisturbed deliberation. The door to the Room will remain closed except for entry and exit, and will be locked when the area is unoccupied. Everyone who enters and leaves the area must sign in and out on the log provided by the Recorder. Total isolation is an objective. All discussions pertaining to the evaluation will take place within this room, exclusive of briefings to the SSA or the Program Manager, or other briefings authorized by the SSA. No portfolios, folders, or non-source selection information may be brought into the area unless the material is necessary for evaluation. Such determinations will be made by the Recorder. All other material will be deposited at the entrance and reclaimed when leaving the area. Incoming phone messages will be relayed by the Recorder. A limited number of phones are available for official calls. Additional instructions on the use of the evaluation area will be circulated and posted prominently. The Recorder controls the number of keys issued for access to the evaluation area and is responsible for the accountability thereof.

(c) Proposal Control: All proposals received will be marked by a copy number, and then filed by volume. A control log for distribution of sections or volumes will be maintained by the Recorder. The Recorder will be responsible for logging the proposals in and out for the evaluators use. Access approval will be checked prior to checking out proposals to any person connected with the evaluation activities.

BB-48
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

(d) Classified Material: Specific containers are provided for classified material. They will be marked so they are easily distinguished from those provided for unclassified source selection sensitive information. Particular care must be exercised in the disposal of classified waste, and the classification, where necessary, of the individual evaluations. Any questions concerning the classification of any material should be referred to the OSM or AO. Discussion of classified information should take place in areas segregated from unclassified discussion areas.

(e) Working Hours: The source selection area will be open 07301730 hours, Monday through Friday. It may be necessary to increase hours of operation in order to meet the source selection schedule. Such rescheduling will be announced in advance, and the cooperation of all participants is expected. Should personnel wish to extend the days effort, they will notify the Recorder or alternate, who will then remain as long as necessary.

(f) Schedule of Events: The daily schedule for this source selection is presented below:

BB-49
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-50
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

DAILY SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

EVENT DAY OPR

(Est. days.
enter date
DDMMMYY)
Receive PR -170 PCO
Sources Sought Synopsis Issued -156 PCO/PO
Sources Sought Synopsis Published -150 PCO
Receive Contractor Qualification
Statements -120 PCO/PO
Evaluate Qualification Statements
Completed -110 PCO/PO
Acquisition Strategy Panel Completed - 80 PCO/PO/PK
Request For SSA Delegation From SECAF - 80 SSO
Start Acquisition Plan (AP) - 80 PCO/PO
Start Source Selection Plan (SSP) - 80 PO/PCO/Rec
Start Draft RFP/RFP - 80 PCO/PO
Start Source Selection Evaluation Guide
(SSEG) - 80 PO/Rec
Start Orders - 80 Rec
Draft RFP to Industry - 75 PCO/PO
Receive Comments From Industry - 45 PCO/PO
RFP To Contract Writing - 42 PCO/PKXB
Solicitation Review Board Completed - 28 PCO/PO
RFP To Contract Writing for changes - 21 PCO/PKXB
RFP Review Complete - 16 PCO/PKC/JA
Issue Notice of Contract Action - 16 PCO
Notice of Contract Action Published - 10 PCO
AP Approved - 02 PCO/PO
SSP Approved - 02 PO/Rec
SSEG Approved - 02 PO/Rec
Orders Approved - 02 Rec
Comp RFP Rel Brief Charts/Exe Mgt Sum Ltr - 02 Rec/PO/
Chair/PCO
RFP Release Briefing to SSA - 01 Rec/PO/
Chair/PCO
Exe Mgt Sum Letter Signed by SSA - 01 PCO
RFP Released - 0 PCO
Receive Contractor Questions/Comments + 10 PCO/PO
Issue RFP Amendment if required + 15 PCO
Receive Performance Volumes + 15 PCO/Rec
Release Performance Questionnaires + 15 Rec
SSET Orientation Briefing Charts Completed + 20 Rec/Chair/PO
SSET Orientation Briefing + 21 Rec/Chair/PO
Proposals Received & Checked + 30 PCO/Rec
Request Audits/Preaward Surveys + 31 PCO
Eval Offeror A/Write Narr/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 31 TT
Start Consolidated Lists of
NARR/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 33 Rec
Eval Offeror B/Write Narr/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 33 TT
Eval Offeror C/Write Narr/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 35 TT
Complete Consolid Lists of
NARR/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 36 Rec
Review & Rate Consolid DR/CR/RA/S&W + 40 TT
Issue Ltr For Competitive Range Briefing + 40 Rec
Prepare Draft Color/S&W Charts + 45 Rec
Receive Performance Information/
Questionnaires + 45 Rec/PRAG

BB-51
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4-- Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

Performance Risk Assessment Completed + 46 PRAG/Rec
Prepare PRAG Performance Charts + 46 PRAG/Rec
Start Writing PAR + 46 PO/Rec
Start Writing Lessons Learned Report + 46 Rec/PO/Chair
Complete Competitive Range Briefings
Charts + 46 Rec/PO
Competitive Range Briefing Dry Run + 47 TT/Chair/ CT/PRAG
Correct Competitive Range Charts + 48 Rec
Coordinate CR/DR with JA & SSO + 48 TT/CT
Competitive Range Briefing To SSA + 49 TT/Chair /CT/PRAG
Release Ltrs To Krs Outside Competitive
Range + 50 PCO
Release Questions To KRS In Competitive
Range + 50 PCO
Prepare Contract(s) + 50 PCO
Receive Kr Responses to questions + 60 PCO
Start Contracts review + 61 PCO
Evaluate Responses to questions + 62 TT/Chair
Prepare Questions for Discussions + 63 PCO/TT/PO
Receive Audits/Preaward Surveys + 71 PCO
Complete Contracts Review + 71 JA/PKC
Contract Ready For Offeror Signature + 73 PCO
Discussions With Offeror A + 74 TT/CT/Rec
Discussions With Offeror B + 75 TT/CT/Rec
Discussions With Offeror C + 76 TT/CT/Rec
Request BAFO + 77 PCO
Receive BAFO + 84 PCO
Evaluate BAFO + 86 PCO/TT
Prepare Decision Briefing Charts + 86 Rec/PO
Issue Letters For Decision Briefing + 86 Rec
Complete PAR + 87 Rec/PO
Send 1279 Report + 87 PCO
Prepare Decision Document + 89 Rec/PO
Decision Briefing Dry Run + 91 TT/Chair/CT
Correct Decision Briefing Charts + 92 Rec
Decision Briefing To SSA/Contract Award + 93 TT/Chair/CT
Decision Doc Signed By SSA + 94 TT/Chair
Complete Lessons Learned Report + 94 Rec/PO/Chair
Manual Approval +101 PCO
Contract Award +101 PCO/PKXB
Notifications to Unsuccessful Offerors +101 PCO
Issue Notice of Contract Award +101 PCO
Postaward Conference w/Successful Offeror +110 PCO/PO
Debriefings (Upon Request By Offeror) PCO/TT
Source Selection Closeout +115 REC/PKXC

Chair = SSET Chairperson
CT = Contract Team
JA = JAG
PCO = Procuring Contracting Officer
PK = ASP Chairperson
PKC = Procurement Committee
PKXB = Operations
PKXC = Competition Advocacy Representative Analysis Group
PRAG = Performance Risk
PO = Project Officer
REC = Recorder
SSO = Source Selection Officer
TT = Technical Team

BB-52
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

5. EVALUATION PROCEDURES

(NOTE: This section must track to the section in the SSP)

(a) General: The evaluation methods and procedures will conform to AFFARS Appendix BB and Supplements. The selection of the winning contractor will be made by the SSA based on the SSET s total assessment of the evaluation criteria established in Section M of the RFP.

(b) Proposal Evaluation:

(1) Technical Team:

(i) Each evaluator will evaluate each proposal in its entirety for each item and factor in the technical and management volume, even if the item and factor is outside the evaluator s area of expertise. The evaluator s understanding of the entire proposal will prevent the evaluator from making mistakes in interpreting his/her area of expertise. Also, it is not uncommon for an offeror to propose mutually exclusive approaches to a task in two different portions of his proposal and the evaluator can help to discover them.

(ii) Each portion of a proposal must be evaluated against a related standard identified in the Evaluation Criteria/Standards section of the SSEG. That standard must remain constant for each proposal to prevent the possibility of comparing one proposal to another. A proposal should meet the minimum requirements. If this is done, the offeror should be able to perform the work being contracted in an acceptable manner, on time, and within cost. If any requirement is exceeded in the proposal, and that excess is advantageous to the Government, the evaluation of that proposal must include the facts and reasons behind the high evaluation given. Likewise, any portion of the proposal that does not meet the minimum requirements must be individually evaluated and reported to the SSET. The evaluator must assess the possibility of the offeror correcting the problem to allow his proposal to meet the requirements, and provide the assessment to the Contract Team Price Analyst if manpower or cost are affected.

(iii) Evaluators will identify deficiencies found in each offeror s proposal and record them. A deficiency is defined as any part of an offeror s proposal which when compared to the pertinent standard, fails to meet the Government s minimum level of
compliance. Examples include: Proposed approach which poses an unacceptable risk, omission of data which makes it impossible to assess compliance with the standard for that requirement, or an approach taken by an offeror in the design of its system or project which yields a performance which is not desired. Failure to respond to a criterion is a deficiency. A deficiency gives the offeror the opportunity to revise his proposal. Deficiency Reports will be provided to the offerors remaining in the competitive range for proposal amendment and/or correction.

(iv) Evaluators will identify those aspects of the proposal which require clarification and record them. Examples of items requiring clarification are: minor irregularities and informalities or apparent clerical mistakes which do not give the offer an opportunity to revise or modify its proposal. Clarification requests should specifically identify the aspect of the offeror s proposal for which clarification is required. If the offeror chose not to answer a question, would it affect the rating of his proposal? If the answer is yes, then the issue should be a deficiency, not a clarification. A clarification can potentially become a deficiency if, when the offeror explains the clarification, what initially seemed insignificant is really a major problem. A clarification does not require a weakness on the Strength/Weakness charts. Clarifications alone will not normally change a color rating. Clarification Requests will be provided to the offerors remaining in the competitive range at the same time as the Deficiency Reports.

NOTE: Deficiency Reports and Clarification Requests provided to the offerors do not have to be in question format with a question mark at the end of the statement; "Explain your procedure for XYZ" will get the point across as well as "What software will you use to evaluate ABC?" Evaluators must be concerned about technical leveling when preparing questions (i.e. don't lead him to the correct answer), however, you MUST be direct enough in your questions to tell the offeror what you really want him to respond to. Ask the offeror to explain the merits of why he chose to use method/software/procedure ABC, not why he didn't use method/software/procedure DEF like company XXX. If the offeror failed to answer part of a PPI criterion, tell him which part he failed to answer, not that his answer to PPI criterion #xxx was vague. The offeror cannot give you the answer you need, if he doesn't understand specifically what you want from him.

(v) Evaluators will also identify strong and weak points for each offeror s proposed approach for each item and factor. The significant strong and weak points will be presented on Strength/Weakness Charts (See sample attached), therefore, evaluators should remember that

BB-53
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

every weakness reported on the Strength/Weakness charts requires a deficiency.

(vi) Evaluators will assess each proposal s technical quality, and record the assessment with the appropriate strong and/or weak point. These assessments will be applied against the specific criteria reflected on the Strength/Weakness Charts.

(vii) Evaluators will evaluate the hours proposed in the manpower volumes against the project office estimate of what is required for the job, as that job is proposed by the offeror. Each proposal is likely to look at the job differently, therefore each will have a different manpower requirement. The evaluator will only concern himself with the proposal at hand and not compare the manhours required in a different approach. This evaluation will be coordinated with the Contract Team Price Analyst.

(viii) Evaluators will identify and assess the technical risks associated with each offeror s proposal. The areas of risk which must be assessed are those relevant to this effort such as cost, schedule, and technical aspects of the program. Although, as a part of their proposal, offerors are required to submit a risk analysis which identifies risk areas and the recommended approaches to minimize the impact of these risks on the overall success of the program, evaluators are required to make an independent risk assessment.

In evaluating the technical risk, the evaluators must consider the program office assessment, the offeror s assessment and make an independent judgment of the probability of success, the impact of failure, and the alternatives available to meet the requirements. Risks may occur as a result of a particular technical approach, selecting of certain materials, processes, equipment, etc., which may result in cost, schedule, or economic impacts. Additional risks become apparent when a given approach is estimated to result in marginal operational performance. Certain risks may be known to exist in the program at the time that the solicitation is released. In this case, the proposals must not be penalized merely because of the existence of these particular risks. Measurement of the acceptability must consider both the approach proposed, the alternatives available, and any backup solutions described in the proposal. Risk assessment forms will be submitted to the Contract Team Price Analyst along with the manpower evaluation forms. The risk definitions in AFFARS Appendix BB will be used : (Insert definitions verbatim)

(ix) The evaluations will be conducted utilizing the
following steps:

Step One: Read the SOW, the SSP, and the SSEG.

Step Two: Read the entire proposal.

Step Three: To begin the evaluation of the first factor, open the SSEG to the section on standards. Before you begin writing the Evaluation Narratives, understand the following guidance: In this iteration of the review process you should be fairly picky. Several relatively small complaints may begin to show a general trend and you might find that they should be combined into a single weak point when you are finished. You should include proposal, PPI, or SOW page and paragraph numbers as a reference in the remarks. The references can be useful in resolving disputes over interpretation. Now , comment on the proposal as follows:

Summarize in your own words, on the evaluation narrative forms, the adequacy of the offeror s approach to the whole factor. Do not try to use this space to summarize what he proposed unless you are trying to make a specific point.

Next, comment on his specific performance as regards each SSEG standard in this factor. OK is sufficient if he simply meets the standard. Evaluator not qualified is a reasonable comment when appropriate. But, if you identify a strength or weakness, record it on the Strong/Weak Points Form, using complete sentences and thoughts to describe the situation, and make it clear to the chairman what you did and did not like. Label it a strong or weak point (SP or WP) in the left margin. If it is a fairly significant weak point you should write a brief statement as to the potential negative impact that it could have on the program, and write a candidate Deficiency Report (DR) to go with it, using the Deficiency Report Form. Each candidate DR should include a PPI and SOW reference. Significant strong points should be accompanied by a brief statement as to the benefit to the Government, such as reduces operating cost, reduces risk, increases performance, etc. and a discussion of why it is a benefit. List questions, the answers to which would aid you in completing the evaluation of the factor. These are candidate Clarification Requests (CR), recorded on the Clarification Requests Form, which may be sent to the offerors. Label the DR or CR in the left margin.

If you should notice something in the offeror s approach that introduces an element of risk with regard to his ability to accomplish the job, or which may effect

BB-54
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

schedule of cost, explain what the risk is and why it could affect the program, record it on the Risk Assessment Form.

Now go back one and prioritize the strong points and weak points.

Write your DRs or CRs for each weak point above. Write your Strong Point/Weak Point for each DR. Staple your Evaluation Narrative, Weak Point, and Deficiency Report together in a set. Do this for each Deficiency. Staple your Evaluation Narrative and Clarification Request together in a set. Do this for each Clarification. Staple your Evaluation Narrative and Strong Point together in a set. Do this for each set.

Be sure the top of the evaluation narrative form is filled in with your name, the factor, the offeror, etc., and turn it in to the Recorder or appropriately designed person. These forms do not need to be typed, just legible.

Repeat this procedure for each factor.

Repeat this procedure for each proposal.

Step Four: Consolidate the strengths and weaknesses for each offeror. The Recorder should start working on the first proposal when the evaluators are working on the next proposal. The Recorder should consolidate all the strengths and weaknesses by item/factor either on the strength/weakness charts or on easel paper so the team may work through the wording, validity, severity, and ranking of the issues. Then once the proposals have all been evaluated, the evaluation team can immediately start working on determining the colors and the ranking of bullets. Make one person responsible for recording the wording changes and ranking (not necessarily the Recorder).

NOTE: Do not compare offerors. But remember that for a fair evaluation you must insure that the SSA can make a fair decision. If two offerors did the same thing, use the same words to describe the problem or strength and give it the same emphasis. This drives out what the true differences are between two similar sounding evaluations.

(2) Performance Risk Assessment:

(i) The PRAG Evaluators will identify and assess the performance risks associated with each offeror s proposal using a Risk Assessment Form. Performance risk assesses the offeror's present and past work record to determine the probability of successfully accomplishing what has been promised in their proposal.

The areas of risk which must be assessed are past and present performance, including management and cost, relevant to this effort. Past and present performance must demonstrate an ability to achieve management objectives as shown by performance on related Government efforts. Cost performance risk will be assessed for all contract types. For firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts; however, the analysis will be focused on the contractor s cost management record and program impact caused by change orders, claims, requests for equitable adjustments, and other subsequent cost increases that occur throughout the life of the FFP contract.

Data on the offeror s performance (including that of critical subcontractors or teaming contractors which will be separately identifiable and documented) will be obtained from sources such as the AFMC Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) system (obtained from an AFMC Center representative); information obtained from questionnaires sent to the ACO, PCO, and/or Project Officers, preaward surveys, Contract Alert List, and Contractor Operations Reviews. Each performance evaluation and risk assessment will consider the number and severity of problems, the effectiveness of corrective actions taken, and the overall work record. The assessment of performance risk is not intended to be a simple arithmetic function of an offeror s performance on a list of contracts; but rather, the information deemed most relevant and significant by the PRAG will receive the greatest consideration. In the cost area, the PRAG should give more consideration to efforts for similar end items, efforts during a similar phase of acquisition cycle, and to efforts with similar contract types. The following definitions of performance risk will be used:

(Insert verbatim performance risk definitions from AFFARS Appendix BB)

(3) Contract Team:

(i) The Contract Team Price Analyst will evaluate the manpower and cost aspects of each offeror s proposal to determine that prices are fair and reasonable. Cost proposals will be reviewed in terms of mathematical correctness, relevancy, completeness, and realism. After evaluations of the Technical and Management Area have been completed, and rankings have been established, the evaluation of the cost proposals will be compared against these rankings to determine the combination most advantageous

BB-55
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4-- Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

to the Government, and award(s) will be made on that basis. Price or cost will not be scored. Appropriate use will be made of field pricing reports and audits, Project Officer s Estimate, and Government-developed Independent Cost Analysis or Most Probable Cost Estimates, as applicable. Life Cycle Cost will be considered, if appropriate.

(1) Based upon the collective evaluations, the Technical Team and SSET Chairperson will determine final colors for each offeror, by item, to determine the ranking of the proposals. The color coding method and criteria are defined as follows:

(Insert verbatim color definitions from AFFARS Appendix BB)

As a general guide, an offeror s proposal may be considered for elimination from the competitive range if, in the opinion of the SSET Chairperson, the proposal does not propose an operationally or technically suitable concept or has deficiencies so severe as to preclude resolution in time to be of service to the Government.

(2) The PCO will make a competitive range determination subject to approval by the SSA.

(3) The Technical Team will prepare briefing charts for presenting the proposal rankings to the SSA. A briefing chart matrix (See sample attached) will be used to summarize each proposal by item using the AFFARS Appendix BB color coding scheme. Narrative charts describing strengths/weaknesses for each proposal will be prepared using guidance and examples provided by the SSO.

(d) Discussions/Negotiations:

(1) Discussions will be held with each offeror determined to be within the competitive range. Discussions will begin with each offeror making oral presentations, at the contracting office, discussing the answers to the Clarification Requests and Deficiency Notices. At the presentation the offeror will review any changes from his first proposal, as well as addition of any other information which he feels is pertinent. The offeror will have one hour for his presentation. The Technical Team members and the Recorder will take notes during this presentation. At the conclusion of this presentation, the Technical Team members will caucus to develop questions based on the presentation. The meeting will then resume with a question and answer session. Again, Technical Team members will take notes on any information which may affect their evaluation. The presentations and subsequent interchange will be evaluated by the Technical Team and the PCO. This new information may affect the final assessment of each offeror s proposal. Any deficiencies identified at this time will be presented to the offeror by the PCO in the contract discussion period following this session.

(2) Immediately following the oral presentations and discussions the Contract Team will hold a contract discussion period with the offerors. Discussions will include proposed additions and or exceptions taken to contract terms and conditions, cost area including rates/factors, subcontract costs, and any new deficiencies/clarifications generated by the oral presentations. The offerors will resolve these issues with their best and final offers.

(e) Best and Final Offer (BAFO):

Following discussions, the PCO will issue a letter requesting BAFOs from the offerors remaining in the competitive range.

(f) Final Evaluation and Decision:

When the BAFOs are received, the Technical Team and the Contract Team will evaluate them and revise the Competitive Range briefing charts to show final evaluation including those changes resulting from the oral discussions. The Competitive Range charts will be revised by lining out weaknesses corrected, using the asterisks to indicate those strengths and weaknesses added, and using an overlay with arrows (up or down) to indicate how a color changed.

The revised briefing charts will be briefed to the SSA at the Decision Briefing. The SSA will make a decision on the source(s) to be selected.

The final function of SSET will generate a Lessons Learned Report to be presented to the SSO and a Proposal Analysis Report to be present to the SSA.

Prior to making or announcing any awards of contract, the SSA will brief the Commander of his/her decision. After all matters are complete, the SSA will authorize execution of the successful offerors contract, announcement of award, and contract distribution. The Contract Review Committee will interface with the Office of Information and the Office of Legislative Liaison to ensure the notification of award to congressional interests and the news

BB-56
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

media occur simultaneously.

Upon receipt of a written request for a debriefing from an unsuccessful offeror, the PCO will make the necessary arrangements for same. The debriefing will be conducted by the SSA or his designee. The successful offeror will be debriefed at the Post Award Orientation Conference.

6. EVALUATION CRITERIA/STANDARDS

(a) Structure of Proposals: The proposals which are to be evaluated have been organized into a specific number of volumes and are specified in the PPIs in Section L of the RFP. They are also set forth below:

(Insert Section L, Proposal Preparation Instructions (PPIs), from the RFP. NOTE: This section must be the same as the one in the RFP.)

(b) Evaluation Criteria: Section M of the RFP provides the criteria for each of the areas, items, and factors to be evaluated. The criteria are as follows:

(Insert Section M, Evaluation Criteria, from the RFP. Note: This section must be the same as the one in the SSP and the RFP.)

(c) Evaluation Standards: Standards for evaluating proposals have been established at the lowest level of subdivision of specific evaluation criteria. They indicate the minimum performance or compliance acceptable to enable an offeror to meet the requirements of the solicitation. The following standards shall be utilized in evaluating proposals:

(Insert the standards developed by the project office. Standards may be quantitative or qualitative. Use format in Attachment 5 to AFFARS Appendix BB.)

7. BRIEFINGS/REPORTS/DECISION DOCUMENT

(a) Briefings:

(1) RFP Release Briefing: The SSET Chairperson and the PCO are responsible for presenting the RFP release briefing to the entire source selection board on the technical and contracting aspects of the acquisition. The purpose of this briefing is to obtain SSA s approval of the source list and approval to release the RFP.

(2) Orientation Briefing: Approximately one week before proposals are received, the SSET Chairperson or project officer and the Recorder will brief the entire source selection board on administrative and technical duties, procedures, and other details about the source selection process for this effort.

(3) Competitive Range Briefing: This briefing is a follow-on of the RFP Release Briefing. Following the evaluations by team members, the Technical Team Chief will brief the SSET Chairperson and the PCO on the results of those evaluations. The PCO will make his/her competitive range determine subject to the approval of the SSA. The SSET Chairperson and the PCO will present competitive range briefing to the SSA and the entire source selection board. The briefing provides the SSA with the information necessary to make the final decision on which offerors will remain in the competitive range. It presents each offerors proposed technical and management approach to the acquisition, and reflects the evaluation color-coded scores, as well as the proposal strengths and weaknesses.

(4) Decision Briefing: This briefing is the same as the competitive range briefing, except this briefing reflects the final evaluation. The competitive range charts will be modified to show results of discussions and BAFOs. The SSA makes the source selection decision based on the total assessment of all elements bearing on this competition.

(b) Reports:

(1) Proposal Analysis Report (PAR):

The SSET Chairperson will prepare a PAR summarizing the strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each proposal and the evaluation results of the proposals as originally submitted as well as the results of any clarifications/deficiencies, BAFOs, final negotiations, and proposal revisions measured from the original baseline. This summary will be presented to the SSA for the final source selection decision.

(2) Lessons Learned: In order that planning and procedures can continually be improved, it is incumbent on participants to note problems which have been encountered, and to suggest, if possible, corrective measures. These contributions are categorized as Lessons Learned. Problems should be recorded immediately and turned over to the Recorder for compilation. Postponing this task until the evaluation is complete results in a minimum number being recorded. After determination of successful proposals, the SSET will prepare a lessons learned report. The report will be approved and signed by the SSET

BB-57
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4-- Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

Chairperson and provided to the SSO.

(c) Decision Document: Following the source selection decision by the SSA, the SSET Chairperson and the PCO will prepare, for the SSA s signature, the Source Selection Decision Document. The decision document shall describe the basis for the decision in terms of beneficial value to the Government especially when award is to be made to an offeror with other than the lowest price or cost.

8. TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT SUMMARY CHART

(Insert Chart as set forth in the example chart on the following page.)

BB-58
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 4--Sample Source Selection Evaluation Guide (Cont.)

EXAMPLE OF EVALUATION MATRIX

(Form not reproduceable)

BB-59
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page
BB-60
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 5--Examples of Evaluation Standards

EXAMPLES OF QUANTITATIVE STANDARDS

NOTE: A quantitative standard relates to terms of quantity or a measurement of quantity. For example, a quantitative standard would be involved in an acquisition for services or equipment. The service or item would fail, meet, or exceed the standard.

(1) AREA: TECHNICAL

FACTOR: MISSION SUPPORT

SUBFACTOR: VEHICLE MAINTENANCE

ELEMENT: VEHICLE AVAILABILITY

DESCRIPTION:

This element is defined by the contractor by proposing a vehicle availability rate that supports the Air Force Base Transportation Maintenance mission.

STANDARD:

The proposed availability rate meets the standard of XXX as contained in SOW paragraph XXX.

(2) AREA: TECHNICAL

FACTOR: COMPUTER CAPABILITY

SUBFACTOR: MODEMS

ELEMENT: TRANSMISSION SPEED

DESCRIPTION:

This element is defined as the data transmission speed required to operate in an efficient manner. For example, A speed of at least 2400 baud.

STANDARD:

The standard is met when the modem operates at a speed of at least 2400 baud, IAW SOW paragraph XXX.

EXAMPLES OF QUALITATIVE STANDARDS

NOTE: A qualitative standard relates to quality or kind. It does not relate specifically to quantity.

(1) AREA: TECHNICAL

FACTOR: RANGE SUPPORT

SUBFACTOR: GROUND SAFETY

DESCRIPTION:

The proposed ground safety program will be evaluated for adequacy in meeting Air Force installation ground safety objectives. The evaluation will consider the specific tasks, procedures, criteria, and techniques the contractor proposes to use in the ground safety program.

STANDARD:

The standard is met when the proposal:

a. Defines the scope of the ground safety effort and supports the stated safety objectives;

b. Defines the qualitative analysis techniques proposed for identifying hazards to the depth required; and

c. Describes procedures by which test plans, procedures, test data, and results will be reviewed at appropriate intervals to ensure safety requirements are specified and followed.

(2) AREA: TECHNICAL

FACTOR: JANITORIAL SERVICES

SUBFACTOR: QUALITY CONTROL

DESCRIPTION:

The proposed quality control program will be evaluated for adequacy in meeting the requirements of AFM 64-XXX, "Service Contracts".

BB-61
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 5--Examples of Evaluation Standards (Cont.)

STANDARD:

The standard is met when the contractor provides evidence of a documented and functioning quality control program IAW PWS paragraph(s) XXX.

(3) AREA: MANAGEMENT

FACTOR: PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

SUBFACTOR: COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LICENSING REQUIREMENTS

DESCRIPTION:

The State requires vehicle operations be licensed to move materials of this type. The evaluation will consider the experience and qualifications of the personnel proposed by the offeror to perform this task.

STANDARD:

The standard is met when the offeror provides evidence that the proposed drivers have at least a Class III drivers license and three years experience in this type of effort. IAW PWS paragraph XXX.

BB-62
Air Force FAR Supplement AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 6--FORMAT FOR PREPARING DEFICIENCY REPORTS OR
CLARIFICATION REQUESTS

DEFICIENCY/CLARIFICATION REPORT NO. ___________

OFFEROR____________________________

AREA____________________________
FACTOR________________________

SUBFACTOR____________________ ELEMENT_______________________

Nature of Deficiency/Clarification:

State the nature of the deficiency/clarification. Include a reference to the offerors document, paragraph and page where the deficiency is located.

Summary of the Effect of the Deficiency/Clarification:

State how the uncorrected deficiency/clarification would affect the program if it were accepted as is.

Reference:

Indicate the references that adequately substantiate that the data evaluated are deficient/need clarification. These may be requirements in the solicitation, statement of work, specifications, etc.

___________________ _________________ _________________
Area Team Leader Evaluator Area and Factor

Note: When using this format for Clarification Requests, substitute clarification request for deficiency report and in the body of the request provide:

(1) A clear description of the portion of the proposal needing clarification;

(2) An explanation of how the proposal is either inadequate for evaluation purposes or contains contradictory information;

(3) A statement as to whether the clarification is significant or minor; and

(4) An explanation of the potential impacts on evaluation ratings and risk assessments. (See paragraph BB-307).

BB-63
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page
BB-64
Air Force FAR Supplement AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 7-- Sample SSET Proposal Analysis Report

I. INTRODUCTION. The following shall be included:

a. Purchase Request and Funding information (or other authorization) for the source selection action;

b. Data pertaining to the Source Selection Plan, its date of approval, who prepared the plan, etc.;

c. Basis for award and evaluation criteria (from Section L and M of the RFP);

d. The composition of the SSET, with the names, organization and functional specialties of the members participating on the SSET;

e. Discussion of the requirements set forth in the solicitation, including salient points and a listing of the sources to whom the solicitation was provided; and

f. Identification of the offerors who responded and those included in the competitive range.

II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSALS. This section contains a brief summary description of any significant unique attributes of the proposals submitted by each offeror within the competitive range. No judgments or comparisons as to the quality, rating or ranking of proposals will appear in this section. (The description contained in the CBD synopsis is frequently adequate for this section.)

III. COMPARATIVE TECHNICAL AND RISK ANALYSIS. This section shall assess specific criteria against the evaluation standards and include the following: (Briefing charts may be used in lieu of a narrative analysis. If briefing charts are used, they should be referenced in this section and attached.)

a. A comparative analysis of the proposal and performance risks for proposals within the competitive range. The analysis shall identify strengths and weaknesses, risks, and ratings by area, and any significant factors other than cost that were evaluated. For each area, a list of the factors evaluated should be discussed, first individually and then comparatively. The major strengths, weaknesses, risks and ratings shall be included for each proposal. If a strength, weakness, or risk appears in one proposal and is noteworthy, the analysis shall address that aspect, or a comparable aspect, of all proposals; and

b. A discussion of the overall impact of significant risks associated with each proposal within the competitive range including:

1. Technical risks inherent in the offeror s proposal;

2. Schedule risk as assessed against the technical approach and the prevailing economic environment (for example, material shortages);

3. Confidence that can be placed in the Cost(price) estimate provided by each offeror taking into consideration technical and schedule risk;

4. The financial risk to each offeror in relation to the type of contract and task involved (inappropriate when SBA certifies the offeror);

5. Production risks relating to make-or-buy decisions, anticipated new manufacturing technologies, availability of production facilities, and overall production competence (if applicable);

6. Design trade-offs (if applicable) or Alternate Proposals (if allowed) proposed by the offerors and their potential impact on costs, schedule, technical and overall risk; and

7. An assessment of the contractors performance risks.

IV. COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS. The reasonableness, realism, and completeness of each contractors Cost(price) proposal shall be discussed. This section usually includes data pertaining to cost(price) analysis, Independent Cost Analysis, estimates related to total cost to the government, Most Probable Cost, the impacts of technical uncertainty on Cost(price), Life Cycle Cost, or other appropriate cost(price) considerations. A summary track of costs from initial proposal through BAFO will be provided. Confidence that can be placed in the cost(price) estimate and financial risks shall also be explained. (Briefing Charts may be used in lieu of a narrative analysis. If briefing charts are used, they should be referenced here and attached.)

V. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.

a. Contractual Considerations. Discuss significant contractual arrangements with each offeror in the competitive range and any significant difference between offerors. (If applicable - usually special provisions or arrangements that individual contractors need as part of the overall agreement - such as special GFP, or innovative pricing arrangements, performance incentives or penalties.)

BB-65
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 7--Sample SSET Proposal Analysis Report (Cont.)

b. Other evaluated general considerations which were specified in Section M of the RFP.

VI. SSET FINDINGS. Provide a comparative analysis, expressed in brief statements, of the issues considered by the SSET to be significant to the decision. If requested by the SSA, a recommendation will be included.

SIGNATURE PAGE. A page bearing the signature of the SSET Chairperson, the Technical Team Leader and the Contract Team Leader. (Or others if required by MAJCOM procedures.)

BB-66
Air Force FAR Supplement AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 7--Sample Source Selection Decision Document

SOURCE SELECTION DECISION

FOR THE (Name of Effort)

RFP No.________________

Pursuant to AFFARS Appendix BB and as the Source Selection Authority for this acquisition, I have determined the (Name of Effort) proposed by (Successful Offeror) provides the best overall value to satisfy Air Force needs. This selection was made based upon criteria established in Section M of the Request for Proposal (RFP), Evaluation Factors for Award, and my integrated assessment of the proposals submitted in response to the RFP, the terms and conditions agreed upon during negotiations, and the capability of (Successful Offeror) to fulfill the subject requirement.

The six evaluation criteria against which the potential sources were measured, in order of importance, were (1) Food Preparation; (2) Sanitation; (3) Accounting System; (4) Facility Maintenance; (5) Management; and (6) Past Performance.

While all proposals in the competitive range for the (name) effort are adequate when measured against the above criteria, the (Successful Offerors) proposal clearly provides the best food services effort in terms of food preparation and facilities maintenance effectiveness and efficiency. (Successful Offerors) proposal is superior in terms of food service effectiveness, in part, because of its excellent food preparation plan (Successful Offerors) proposal displayed outstanding consideration for facility maintenance by providing a proven interior and exterior facility maintenance plan. (Successful Offeror) has an excellent track record on similar food service efforts of the same magnitude.

Although the price analysis of (Successful Offeror s) effort indicates that it is not the lowest evaluated price, it is only (XX) percent more than the lowest evaluated price. It is my view that the small difference in total price is more than offset by the superior characteristics of (Successful Offeror s) proposal. (if there is a large price difference, describe in detail why the additional technical quality is worth the price differential) (If life cycle cost is evaluated, it would go in this paragraph.)

In summary, based on my assessment of all proposals in accordance with the specified evaluation criteria, it is my decision that (Successful Offerors) proposal offers the best overall value.

(Source Selection Authority Signature and Signature Block)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Notes:

1. Each decision document must be written to describe the specific rationale for the source selected.

2. Ensure that the decision document adequately addresses the impact of the past performance assessment.

3. This document will likely be released to the public after award.

BB-67
Air Force FAR Supplement AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-68
Air Force FAR Supplement AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN
MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 9--Source Selection Information Cover Sheet

SOURCE SELECTION

INFORMATION

THIS IS A COVER SHEET
DO NOT DEFACE

ONLY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE EXECUTED
A SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION BRIEFING CERTIFICATE
FOR THE SOURCE SELECTION ASSOCIATED WITH
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT(S) MAY HAVE ACCESS TO THE
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN

RETURN
TO:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

SAFEGUARD AT ALL TIMES

BB-69
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 Air Force FAR Supplement
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Blank Page

BB-70
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX BB--SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES FOR OTHER THAN MAJOR ACQUISITIONS

Attachment 10--Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate

Source Selection Information Briefing Certificate

Name: ____________________ Grade: _______ Job Title: _____________

Organization: __________ Source Selection: __________ Date: ______

Briefing Acknowledgment

5. All personnel are requested to check the applicable block:

[ ] I will submit a SF Form 450 or SF 278 to the SSEB chairperson within 10 working days from the date of this certification.

[ ] I am not required to submit a SF Form 450 or SF 278.

Debriefing Certificate

I have been debriefed orally by ____________________________________
as to my obligation to protect all information to which I have had access during this source selection. I no longer have any material pertinent to this source selection in my possession except material that I have been authorized in writing to retain by the SSA. I will not discuss, communicate, transmit, or release any information orally, in writing, or by any other means to anyone after this date unless specifically authorized to do so by a duly authorized representative of the United States Government.

__________________________________________________________
Signature of Person Debriefed Date of Debriefing

__________________________________________________________
Signature of Debriefer Date of Debriefing

BB-71

Blank Page
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER
REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM (SABER)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Paragraph Page

Part 1-General

Scope.................................. DD-101 DD-3
Terms Explained........................ DD-102 DD-3
Purpose of the SABER Program........... DD-103 DD-3
Limitations............................ DD-104 DD-3

Part 2-Acquisition Planning and Source Selection

SABER Working Group.................... DD-201 DD-5
SABER Specifications and the Unit
Price Book........................... DD-202 DD-5
SABER Acquisition Strategy............. DD-203 DD-5
Pre-Solicitation Activities............ DD-204 DD-6
Request for Proposal (RFP)............. DD-205 DD-6
Source Selection....................... DD-206 DD-7

Part 3-SABER Program Execution and Contract Administration

Processing Civil Engineer Project
Orders............................... DD-301 DD-9
Delivery Order Issuance and
Modifications........................ DD-302 DD-10
Inspection and Acceptance.............. DD-303 DD-10
Adding NPIs to the UPB................. DD-304 DD-10
Funding................................ DD-305 DD-11
Liquidated Damages..................... DD-306 DD-11
Bonding................................ DD-307 DD-11

Part 4-Options and Follow-on Contracts

Initial Term and Options............... DD-401 DD-13
Option Price Adjustments............... DD-402 DD-13
Davis Bacon Wage Determinations........ DD-403 DD-13
Follow-on Contracts.................... DD-403 DD-13

Attachments

Title Attachments No. Page

Sample Commerce Business Daily Synopsis. 1 DD-15
Sample Source Selection Plan............ 2 DD-16
Sample Evaluation Criteria.............. 3 DD-21
Sample Proposal Preparation Instructions 4 DD-23
Sample Standards........................ 5 DD-27
Sample SABER Cost Comparison............ 6 DD-31
Sample Clause for SABER Economic Price
Adjustment (EPA)...................... 7 DD-35
Delivery Order File Checklist........... 8 DD-37

DD-1
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Blank Page

DD-2
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

PART 1 GENERAL

DD-101 Scope.

This appendix provides policies, procedures, and guidelines for implementing the Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer Requirements (SABER) program as described at AFFARS 5336.293.

DD-102 Terms explained.

"SABER Contract." A SABER contract is a fixed-price Indefinite-Delivery-Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract with provisions for economic price adjustments. A SABER contract includes a collection of detailed task specifications that encompass most types of real property maintenance, repair, and construction work. SABER contracts include options for work in years beyond the initial performance period. The significant features of a SABER contract include

(1) "The Unit Price Book (UPB)." The UPB is made up of the detailed task specifications along with a standard unit of measure and a unit price for each. The task specifications and unit prices apply to a general area or industry, therefore it is necessary to tailor the UPB to the costs and practices of a specific location. This step, which is called localization, is critical to the success of a SABER program. Localization of the voluminous data in the UPB is normally accomplished using computer programs. Government and commercial software alternatives are available for compiling the basic task listings and standard unit prices and the localization process; and

(2) "Coefficients." Coefficients are factors that are multiplied against the standard unit prices in the UPB in calculating Delivery Order (DO) prices. During source selection for the SABER contract, offerors propose coefficients in consideration of cost elements such as: overhead, profit, minimum design costs, G&A expenses, bond premiums, and gross receipts taxes. The number of coefficients that a SABER contract will contain is determined by the installation's requirements. The coefficients may include bands or ranges based on dollar levels, standard and non-standard hours, range or isolated site work, or work in secured areas. The coefficient also reflects the offeror's perception of the accuracy of the UPB. UPBs that are consistently lower than prices found in the local economy will cause the contractor to bid high coefficients. Inconsistent or unbalanced UPBs increases the uncertainty in preparing proposals. This can lead to high coefficients or inequitable pricing of SABER contracts. This reinforces the importance of localizing the UPB.

"Minimum Design". SABER Minimum design is design effort that is incidental to accomplishing the required task. Generally, minimum design would be exceeded if a typical general construction contractor would need to hire additional expertise in order to accomplish the project. The Base Civil Engineer (BCE) has the responsibility for determining what constitutes minimum design.

"SABER Delivery Order." Prices for individual SABER delivery orders are determined by applying contractor's coefficients to items covered by UPB and negotiating prices for items that are not included in the UPB. These Non-priced Items (NPI) must be within the basic intent and general scope of the contract and be negotiated separately from UPB items prior to issuance of the delivery order.

DD-103 Purpose of the SABER Program.

(a) The purpose of the Air Force SABER program is to expedite contract award of civil engineer requirements by reducing civil engineer design work and acquisition lead time. SABER is best suited for non-complex minor construction and maintenance and repair projects that require minimum design.

(b) Benefits of a successful SABER program include--

(1) Improved customer service and responsiveness. After the initial contract is awarded, Delivery Orders (DOs) for individual projects can usually be estimated, proposed, negotiated and issued in three to four weeks; and

(2) A contractor that is highly motivated to produce high quality work in a timely manner. While the Indefinite-Delivery-Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract must guarantee a minimum dollar value of work, award of additional work can be dependent on the quality and timeliness of the contractor's performance under the contract.

DD-104 Limitations.

(a) General. SABER should complement the traditional construction program, not replace it. SABER is not appropriate for large, complex construction projects that require extensive design effort or for predominately single skill/material projects, for which competitively bid contracts or single trade IDIQ contracts would be more cost effective. SABER cannot be used to make up for inadequate planning by the Government, which can lead to numerous changes after construction is started. Whatever benefits are gained from the expeditious start of a project can be quickly over-

DD-3
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

come by subsequent delays and added costs to correct poor planning and preparation.

(b) Architect-Engineer Services.

(1) The Brooks Act (40 U.S.C. 541-544) requires engineering services to be acquired using specific procedures, which are set forth in FAR Subpart 36.6. SABER shall not be used to acquire engineering services as defined at FAR 36.102.

(2) Taskings in SABER UPBs and corresponding coefficients include minor design effort needed to complete a project, such as basic layout and planning of work, fabrication and assembly of structural elements, form fit and attachment details for installation of materials and or equipment, production of shop and/or record drawings, and other similar activities which do not require the services of a registered architect or engineer. However, a SABER contract may not be used to execute a project that was designed using A-E services except when

(A) Design validation/updating is required for an A-E designed project due to age of the design; or

(B) The A-E design was not completed beyond 35% and the remaining design effort does not require a significant amount of A-E Services.

(c) Delivery Order Limitations. An individual SABER DO shall not exceed $200,000, unless this limitation is waived by the installation commander. For projects over $200,000, the use of SABER pre-priced UPB may result in excessive project costs. Therefore, another contracting approach may be more appropriate. The $200,000 limitation also applies when a proposed modification to a delivery order would cause the delivery order to exceed $200,000. The waiver must be approved before the DO can be issued and is based on economic and mission requirements. The waiver authority may not be redelegated. The waiver package shall include the following--

(1) A comparison of the cost of using the SABER DO versus that of the contracting approach that would otherwise be used. This analysis must be certified by the civil engineer commander;

(2) A statement signed by the civil engineer commander outlining the mission requirements and cost considerations that justify use of a SABER order instead of an alternative contracting approach; and

(3) The written approval signed by the installation commander.

Note: An approved waiver to the DO limitation does not negate the contractor's right under the Delivery Order Limitations (FAR 52.216-19) and the Indefinite Quantity (FAR 52.216-22) clauses to reject an order that exceeds the contract maximum.

(d) NPI Limitations. The need to negotiate NPIs reduces the efficiency of the SABER contract and may undermine the cost savings of prepriced items realized through the SABER competition. The value of NPIs for an individual SABER DO shall not exceed 10% of the total value of the DO, unless this limitation is waived by the installation commander. The waiver authority may not be redelegated and does not extend to DOs in which NPIs would exceed 25% of the value of the DO. Therefore, no SABER DO may be issued when the relative value of its NPIs exceeds 25%. The waiver must be approved before the DO can be issued and may be based on economic or mission requirements. The waiver package shall include the following--

(1) A comparison of the cost of using the SABER DO versus that of the contracting approach that would otherwise be used. This analysis must be certified by the civil engineer commander;

(2) A statement signed by the civil engineer commander outlining the mission requirements and cost considerations that justify use of the SABER order with NPIs that exceed the 10% limitation instead of using an alternative contracting approach; and

(3) The written approval signed by the installation commander.

(e) Non-Personal Services. SABER shall not be used to perform non-personal services subject to the provisions of the Service Contract Act (for example, a delivery order solely to install carpet when the labor involved exceeds $2500). The Department of Labor (DoL) has jurisdiction over whether a particular requirement is classified as construction work subject to the Davis Bacon Act or services to which the Service Contract Act applies. DoL guidance provides that services such as carpet installation, landscaping, asbestos removal, and building demolition may be performed as construction when the work is incidental to a larger construction project. If the preponderance of the work involves the services cited, although there may be some incidental related construction work, the project falls under the Services Contract Act and shall not be performed using SABER.

DD-4
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Part 2 ACQUISITION PLANNING AND SOURCE SELECTION

DD-201 SABER Working Group.

(a) Successful SABER programs require team effort. Whether establishing a new SABER program or awarding a follow-on contract, a working group of all SABER players in CE and Contracting should be convened at the beginning of the planning process. This group should be chaired by the BCE or SABER Chief, assisted by the contracting officer and should hold regularly scheduled meetings until the solicitation is issued. The working group should gain the support of the installation commander and the using organizations. An early beginning to this communication and education process is crucial to the SABER program's success.

(b) Initially, the SABER working group should concentrate on--

(1) Estimating the expected scope of SABER for the installation or civil engineer organization, in order to establish a budget for the SABER program and the guaranteed maximum and minimum amounts to be included in the contract;

(2) Contacting associate organizations and other local Department of Defense installations as possible sources for up-front funding and projected budget requirements; and

(3) Determining the best organization for the SABER unit, including a calculation of the appropriate size of the SABER staff and identification of the types of personnel needed. The working group should investigate the feasibility of establishing a joint effort with other nearby bases (including Army, Navy, Air Force Reserve and National Guard installations).

DD-202 SABER Specifications and the Unit Price Book.

(a) Once the SABER requirements and budget are established, the BCE prepares the SABER program specifications. These include the master specification and the technical, or guide specifications. The master specification describes the overall scope of the SABER program and is included in Section C of the Request For Proposal (RFP) under the heading "Description/Specification/Work Statement." The technical specifications define the specific construction standards for the tasks that will be ordered under the contract and form the basis developing line item work tasks in the UPB.

(b) After developing the specifications, the BCE prepares the UPB, which is a compilation of the standard work tasks along with a standard unit prices that will be included in the RFP and contract. Each of the prospective contractors will propose multipliers, or coefficients, This listing of prepriced items becomes the basis for what may be ordered under the SABER contract. The UPB is the tailoring of the base data (which are priced at various locations nationally) to reflect accurate local construction practices and costs.

DD-203 SABER Acquisition Strategy.

(a) As early in the acquisition process as practicable, the contracting officer shall convene an Acquisition Strategy Panel (see AFFARS 5307.104-91) to ensure that an effective approach is established for executing the acquisition.

(b) At this point, the heads of the operational contracting and civil engineer organizations should jointly determine the best SABER unit organizational structure to maximize communications and provide a dedicated team approach. The contracting personnel responsible for SABER may include contracting officers, negotiators, price analysts, and administrators, depending on acquisition phase and installation SABER workload. The individual serving as the SABER administrator should be involved as early as possible in the process, even if not normally part of solicitation and contract award activities.

(1) Acquisition background and program objectives;

(2) The anticipated SABER requirements and program value;

(3) The master and guide specifications and the UPB; and

(4) The anticipated delivery or performance period requirements.

(d) In developing the Acquisition Plan the contracting officer should consider--

(1) The anticipated sources;

(2) The need to enhance competition and use streamline source selection procedures;

(3) Any unique contracting considerations;

DD-5
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

(4) Budgeting and funding concerns;

(5) Any management information requirements;

(6) Government furnished property (for example, office space, furniture, telephones, utilities, etc.;

(7) Environmental considerations;

(8) Security considerations;

(9) Milestones for the acquisition cycle; and

(10) Identification of the participants in the acquisition planning.

(e) The Acquisition Plan should contain a schedule with milestones that identify the OPR and a date by which each task must be completed. Again, the preparation of the acquisition plan is a team effort requiring the inputs of both the contracting and civil engineer representatives, and specific OPRs should be aware of their required contributions. While the contracting officer maintains overall control of the plan, the technical elements of the requirement are the responsibility of the BCE.

DD-204 Pre-Solicitation Activities. This phase of the SABER acquisition process includes all activities associated with standard construction contracting, including applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.

(a) Commerce Business Daily (CBD) Synopsis Requirements and pre-solicitation notices. FAR 5.101 requires contracting officers to publicize proposed contract actions to increase competition, broaden industry participation in Government requirements, and assist small and small disadvantaged businesses in obtaining contracts and subcontracts. SABER solicitations are, at a minimum, publicized in the CBD. A sample CBD synopsis is provided at Attachment 1. Also, the contracting officer should consider using presolicitation notices (see FAR 15.404) to identify interested sources and to facilitate preparation of proposals by interested offerors to save time and documentation. FAR 36.302 provides additional information regarding construction presolicitation notices.

(b) Source Selection Plan (SSP). Use streamlined source selection procedures (see AFFARS Appendix BB) in order to significantly reduce the administrative and technical requirements of the formal source selection process and still allow the basis of contract award to be other than price and price related factors. The SSP is prepared by the contracting officer using civil engineer inputs. The plan is a detailed document that specifies the source selection process and identifies the evaluation criteria to be used in awarding the SABER contract. A sample SSP is provided as Attachment 2 and evaluation criteria as Attachment 3.

DD-205 Request for Proposal (RFP).

(a) The SABER RFP should closely mirror the format and content for a large construction solicitation. Specifically, a SABER RFP should include the following:

(1) Section B of the Schedule, identify the coefficient(s) that the offeror must propose and describe--

(A) The factors that generally make up the coefficient(s);

(B) Instances where two or more coefficients may be required (e.g. for standard hours, non-standard hours, geographically-separated ranges or sites, and secure areas); and

(C) Instructions for incorporating Davis Bacon Act labor rate updates and other appropriate changes in the coefficients for options. The contracting officer should establish an Economic Price Adjustment (EPA) clause in accordance with instructions in Attachment 4.

(2) Section C of the Schedule should clearly define the SABER requirements, including

(A) The scope and nature of the requirement;

(B) The applicable contract technical specifications and UPB;

(C) A sample calculation of a "typical" SABER project (using a project that will actually be awarded later under the resulting SABER contract); and

(D) The level of architectural/drafting support to be performed by the contractor.

(3) In developing the elements of the RFP--

(A) Specify a first contract performance period of 12 months (to provide a full year's performance for option exercise purposes), if any phase-in period is required, it should be a separate, unpriced line item in the solicitation and resulting contract;

(B) Do not establish the start of performance periods/option years on or about 1 October (get away from tying it to the beginning/end of the fiscal year);

DD-6
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

(D) Minimize the number of price coefficients and keep them as simple as possible;

(E) Do not use the term "overtime" in reference to non-standard hour effort;

(F) Establish realistic contract minimum and maximum dollar amounts;

(G) Establish, understand, and be able to explain the method for option years adjustments (using either the EPA clause and pre-determined formulas/criteria or by updating the UPB);

(H) Identify any required permits or certifications such as asbestos removal or environmental work;

(I) Consider limiting the contractor's technical proposals to 50 pages or less to expedite evaluation. Do not set a limit on resumes;

(J) Require large businesses to include subcontracting plans with initial offers. This prevents premature indications that a firm is the apparent successful offeror and avoid delays resulting from subsequent contracting officer requests for such plans; and

(K) Keep the base legal office and reprographics function apprised of your solicitation schedule to accommodate short suspenses.

(3) Terms and Conditions. Address the following items as appropriate--

(A) Bonding requirements;

(B) Ordering procedures;

(C) The Government's right to perform work of the same type as the SABER contractor without breaching or violating the contract; and

(D) A mechanism for and frequency of adding NPIs to the UPB.

(e) Pre-proposal Conferences. The unique aspects of SABER and the requirements of each installation make pre-preproposal conferences worthwhile. These conferences force the Air Force SABER team to consider various perspectives and differing interpretations of the Government's solicitation. By allowing potential contractors to ask questions, the Air Force can anticipate the receipt of better proposals and an overall smoother acquisition. Part of planning for the conference should include the selection of an appropriate facility conducive to questions, discussion, and the exchange of information.

DD-206 Source Selection.

(a) SABER programs should use streamlined source selection procedures in AFFARS Appendix BB in order to select the SABER contractor in order to balance technical, cost, and business decisions, except when 8(a) procedures are used. The goal is to select the contractor whose proposal offers the highest degree of credibility and best meets the Government's requirements at an affordable cost.

(b) A key to performing a successful source selection is the early identification of team members. It is important to train personnel who are not familiar with their responsibilities; start as early as possible. In addition to the normal functional representatives on the source selection evaluation team, the contracting team, and the technical team, it is smart to include a technical person on the contracting team. That person assists in the technical evaluation of cost proposals to determine whether a cost proposal is complete, reasonable, and realistic. It is also a good idea to have a contracting person as an advisor to the technical team to advise on contractual matters and ensure the integrity of the process. (Additionally, use local or headquarters pricing assistance if such support is available.) Civil Engineer normally leads the technical team, operational contracting the contracting team. Considering the long range (multi-year) and high cost impacts, it is wise to put your best, most qualified personnel on both teams. This up-front effort should make SABER run much smoother and more efficiently over the life of the program.

(c) Use of evaluation criteria that reflect the requirements of the SABER program will enable the Government to emphasize technical ability and quality in reaching a source selection decision. The Government source selection team must work together to identify important customer requirements. Examples of evaluation criteria that have been effectively used in SABER source selections include

(1) Project management ability, including key project management staff, the quality control plan, financial resources, and technical support staff;

(2) Subcontracting support capability and subcontract management, including identification of key subcontractors; purchasing system/level of subcontracting,

DD-7
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

(3) Project execution, including sample project preparation/submission and related or applicable experience; and

(4) Price, including completeness, reasonableness, and realism.

NOTE: These criteria are weighted in order of descending importance. Installations have
confirmed the importance of emphasizing the contractor's management staff above other evaluation criteria. Examples of evaluation criteria are included as Attachment 3.

(d) While technical considerations are more important than price in a streamlined source selection, the pricing coefficient is an important factor in a SABER program and must be fair and reasonable in order for the proposed contract to be awardable. The contracting officer is responsible for determining if an offeror's proposed coefficients are realistic and complete in relation to the solicitation and represent a reasonable price for award of the SABER contract.

(e) Concerning project execution criteria, include in Section M of the solicitation a statement similar to the following--

"As part of the evaluation of the offeror's ability to execute projects under the contract, a sample SABER project is attached to this solicitation. Each offeror should submit one or more design concepts, list of assumptions used to develop the concept(s), list of priced items from the unit price book, list of non-priced items, simple design drawings, material submittals, time frame required to start and finish project, and an overall proposal of project execution. The Government will assess the ability of each offeror as to the level of overall execution of the project, completeness of the priced and non-priced listings, cost effectiveness of decisions, completeness, applicability, and logic of overall proposal(s)."

(f) Include a statement advising offerors that in developing their proposed coefficient(s) they must consider all allowable contractor costs, including contingencies and profit. The only changes to the coefficients that will be permitted will be those that made under the economic price adjustment clause of the contract. In evaluating the reasonableness and realism of offerors' proposals, Government personnel should be aware that the coefficient(s), may be based on cost elements such as--

(1) State gross receipts taxes and payroll taxes, such as FICA, workmen's' compensation (when not included in the wage determination), state and federal unemployment taxes for direct payroll employees;

(2) Material and labor costs, superintendents' salaries, builders' risk insurance, mobilization and demobilization expenses and bond premiums; and

(3) Various overhead expenses, such as site office overhead, field office building, furniture, equipment, on-site office staff salaries, vehicle and construction equipment maintenance, office administrative expenses and a proportional share of home office overhead.

(g) Other streamlined source selection and contract award considerations include the need to--

(1) Keep Source Selection Authority at the base level, preferably the Wing Commander, or the Vice Wing Commander (who often serves as the Competition Advocate and is familiar with the contracting processes);

(2) Maintain continuity in the Government source selection teams once the source selection process is started;

(3) Establish a realistic schedule (despite political pressures to commit to unrealistic milestones) for accomplishing all of the necessary activities. Ensure that the schedule allows time for MAJCOM business and contract clearance requirements.

(4) Hold discussions with offerors within the competitive range before issuing the request for Best and Final Offers. This is one of the major advantages of using the source selection process, instead of sealed bidding;

(5) Avoid awarding the contract late in the fiscal year, so that obligating the guaranteed minimum could cause problems with the bona fide need rule; and

(6) Ensure that all members of the source selection team receive clear instructions on their duties and responsibilities in the source selection. The proposal evaluations must be comprehensive and all ratings well documented and supported by good narratives.

DD-8
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

PART 3 SABER PROGRAM EXECUTION AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

DD-301 Processing Civil Engineer Project Orders.

(a) Issuance of project order. The Civil Engineer Project Manager--

(1) Provides the statement of work, including concepts, sketches, and drawings;

(2) Identifies any statutory cost limitations;

(3) States any special instructions or requirements; and

(4) Includes a preliminary independent cost estimate and any required cost comparisons, justifications, and approvals.

(b) Site visit. The SABER project manager/inspector, contracting officer representative, using organization, and contractor will conduct a scope validation/site visit for each delivery order. Discussions include--

(1) Site access;

(2) Methods and alternatives for accomplishing work;

(3) Definition and refinement of requirements;

(4) Requirements for plans, sketches, drawings, etc.;

(5) Detailed scope of work; and

(6) Time requirements for completion, phasing requirements, and liquidated damages.

(c) Independent Government Cost Estimate. After the joint scope validation site visit, the SABER Project Manager updates the project order package to include any revised drawings and submits a detailed independent Government cost estimate, as required by FAR 36.203. For DOs or DO modifications that exceed $25,000, the Government cost estimate is required. For DOs or modifications that are less than $25,000, this requirement is optional at the discretion of the contracting officer. The contracting officer may not begin negotiations without the independent cost estimate and must justify in the price negotiation memorandum (PNM) any differences from these estimates. Should the estimate change, for any reason, the revised estimate and accompanying explanation/rationale must be provided in a timely manner to the contracting officer. The Government cost estimate must identify and provide cost estimates for any NPIs. The estimate shall be approved in writing by the appropriate BCE official; stamped "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY;" and protected from unauthorized disclosure. If the project scope changes significantly or negotiations reveal errors in the Government estimate, the SABER program manager will provide a corrected estimate or explanation to the contracting officer.

(d) Contractor's proposal. After receiving the formal purchase request and approved independent cost estimate, the contracting officer requests the contractor to provide a detailed price proposal. The contractor develops this proposal by identifying necessary tasks in the UPB, verifying as-built drawings, refining quantities, pricing NPIs, preparing working drawings, and developing performance times. The SABER program manager may need to answer questions from the contractor and clarify technical aspects of the project.

(e) Delivery Order Negotiation.

(1) The contract administrator and contracting officer review the contractor's proposal for scope compliance, completeness and reasonableness by comparing it with the Government requirement and cost estimate. The contract administrator then forwards the technical proposal to the program manager for a technical review of the proposal. The contracting officer evaluates the proposed method of construction, tasks, and quantities and performance schedules and any contractor drawings.

(2) After receiving the technical evaluation from the program manager, the contracting officer conducts meetings to review the proposal with the contractor. The contracting officer, with technical assistance from the program manager, establishes the government's negotiation objective, including any variations involving tasks, methodology, quantities, NPIs, and timelines. If the period of performance exceeds 60 days, the contracting officer should establish specific progress reporting requirements. The contracting officer must ensure that the value of the DO does not exceed $200,000 or the relative value of the NPIs does not exceed 10% of the value of the DO, without proper waiver approvals. An example of a SABER cost comparison to justify waiver of the $200,000 limitation is provided as Attachment 5.

(3) If the contractor's proposal is not acceptable, either--
(A) Return the proposal to the contractor for rework; or

DD-9
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

(B) Return the work request folder to the BCE to determine if the project should be canceled, delayed, or accomplished by some other means than the SABER contract.

(4) After completing negotiations, the contracting officer prepares a price negotiation memorandum (PNM) in accordance with FAR 15.8. All SABER delivery orders must have a PNM that--

(A) Specifies the extent the contracting officer relied on the government estimate and explains any significant differences between the estimate and the final negotiated price;

(B) Describes any changes to the government negotiation position and Government estimate. Additional technical support documentation required to support a change in the objective, will be prepared by the program manager and revisions to the estimate must be approved by the appropriate BCE;

(C) Explains the basis for the final negotiated amounts for each task under the UPB and each NPI and demonstrate that the contracting officer effectively considered all significant aspects of the project and contractor's proposal; and

(D) Contains a determination that the negotiated price is fair and reasonable.

DD-302 Delivery Order Issuance and Modifications.

(a) After all required documentation and approvals such as Business Clearance requirements, have been completed, the contracting officer issues the DO. The DO should include the specifications and/or statement of work and any associated drawings. The contractor commences work in accordance with the negotiated schedule.

(b) If bona fide differing site conditions are encountered during the execution of the delivery order, or a legitimate change to the work is required, the delivery order may be modified.

(1) The program manager will initiate a request for modification in the same manner as the transmittal of the original requirement. The contracting officer and program manager must thoroughly document all actions (new site visits, technical evaluations, negotiations, etc.) regarding the change to include any consideration given or received.

(2) The contracting officer then requests the contractor to submit a change proposal to address any new taskings or changes to the current DO. The change proposal is evaluated by the Government in much the same manner as the original proposal. If the modification would cause the DO to exceed the limitations at DD 104, a waiver must be approved before the modification to the DO may be issued.

DD-303 Inspection and Acceptance.

(a) The program manager is responsible for ensuring the performance of quality assurance inspections associated with the delivery order until work completion, including final inspection and acceptance. Inspection requirements specified in AFI 32-1023, Design and Construction Standards and Execution of Facility Construction Projects must be followed, just as in any other contract.

(b) Contracting officers and contract administrators must establish procedures to monitor contractual requirements including the percentage of direct work completed by the SABER contractor as specified in the Performance of Work by the Contractor clause at FAR 52.236-1. Additionally, the SABER program manager must provide surveillance to ensure compliance with contractual superintendence and DBA requirements.

(c) The goal of the contracting process is to have the contractor satisfactorily perform the requirements of the basic contract and each delivery order. Upon acceptance and certification of work completion, the acceptance documentation is forwarded to accounting and finance for payment. When the DO is completed, the program manager forwards the inspection logs to the contract administrator (for inclusion in the contract file) and the project folder to Customer Service for close out.

DD-304 Adding NPIs to the UPB.

(a) When prices for NPIs are negotiated and incorporated in a DO, this does not incorporate the items in the UPB for subsequent use as a priced item. To permit subsequent use under the UPB, NPIs must be incorporated by supplemental agreement to the SABER contract. This may be done in conjunction with an annual update to the UPB to address economic conditions or separately at another time during the year. Also, a contract provision may be developed to permit regular (such as quarterly or annual) incorporation of negotiated NPIs into the UPB. However, prices already established in the UPB may not be adjusted in this way.

DD-10
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

(b) Once an item has been added to the UPB, it becomes a prepriced item under the contract. Therefore, when negotiating NPI additions to the UPB, care must be taken to ensure only the direct costs of the NPI are included in the UPB. Before adding items to the UPB, adjust negotiated current year direct costs. Account for indirect costs by applying the coefficient to the UPB price when the requirement is ordered under individual DOs. To simplify the process of adding NPIs to the UPB, NPIs should be negotiated at current year direct costs and then adjusted back to base year costs by multiplying by the economic price adjustment index for the base year and dividing by the contract economic price adjustment index for the current year. The coefficient can be applied to a delivery order NPI when only direct costs are negotiated for the NPI.

DD-305 Funding.

(a) In order to expedite year end or emergency requirements, SABER Projects may be processed up to the point of award in advance of funding.

(1) The independent Government cost estimate must be provided to the contracting officer prior to negotiations.

(2) Prior to requesting the contractor's proposal (if the contract does not include a line item for project estimating, proposal fee paid to the contractor and later deducted from the delivery order amount if the project is awarded), the contracting officer must obtain from the contractor a no cost agreement if the order is not awarded with acknowledgment that funds are not available.

(b) The contracting officer establishes milestones for actions in support of end of year actions to ensure sufficient lead time for SABER review, approval requirements, receipt of independent SABER project cost estimates, technical analyses, and negotiations. Cut off dates are established to ensure the government negotiation team has adequate time to review the estimate and develop a negotiation objective prior to negotiations.

DD-306 Liquidated Damages.

(a) Liquidated damages are applicable to individual delivery orders, not the total contract.

(b) The determination to include liquidated damages on a delivery order shall follow the procedures in FAR 12.202 and 36.206. Consideration must be given to the total number of orders outstanding and the ability of the contractor to control project milestones.

DD-307 Bonding.

(a) The amount of bonding the government requires is determined in accordance with FAR Part 28. For SABER contracts, the initial bond amounts are based upon the guaranteed minimum quantity.

(b) FAR 28 allows the contracting officer flexibility in increasing the bond amounts in the course of contract performance. When the value of delivery orders in progress exceeds the existing bonding, the contracting officer should get additional bond protection by directing the contractor to increase the penal amount of the existing bond, or to obtain additional bonds. When the guaranteed dollar amount is exceeded, FAR 28.102-2(a) and (b) penal sums apply. The cost for the additional bond security is included in the coefficient and no adjustment to price shall be made.

(1) In negotiated SABER contracts, the contractor should include bond premiums costs as indirect costs based upon the total contract amount, not just the bonding requirements imposed for the minimum guarantee at contract award.

(2) The payments clause (FAR 52.232.5) requires the government to reimburse the contractor for bond premiums upon request if the contractor provides evidence of full payment of such premiums to the surety. Since the premiums are an indirect expense which have been included in the contractor's coefficient, payment for such premiums are the same as all other progress payments made under delivery orders. Payment for bond premiums, at any point during contract performance, are not additional costs under the contract.

DD-11
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Blank Page

DD-12
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Part 4 Options and Follow-on Contracts

DD-401 Initial Term and Options. The initial term of a SABER contract is normally 12 months. SABER contracts include options to increase the term of the contract in annual increments. In deciding the number of annual options to include, the contracting officer should balance the benefits of increased administrative efficiency in exercising the option and the positive performance incentive offered to the incumbent contractor against the added economic and market risks that result from extending the contract term. Generally, three options years offer an optimum balance. The contracting officer shall not include options for more than four years.

DD-402 Option Price Adjustments. SABER contracts shall contain provisions for making annual adjustments to the option prices. This may be done either by incorporating a new UPB that has been updated to reflect current market conditions or by updating the coefficients using criteria and predetermined formulas in an economic price adjustment (EPA) clause. See Attachment 7 for an example of a coefficient adjustment clause.

DD-403 Davis Bacon Wage Determinations. Each year new Davis Bacon wage determinations, which are issued by the Department of Labor, must be incorporated into the contract. New wage rates may be incorporated in the UPB under a contract clause that provides for annual updates to the UPB or by adjusting the coefficients under an EPA clause. An example of a contract clause follows:

"Incorporation of Current Davis Bacon Wage Decision for Option Periods.

The Contracting Officer shall, concurrent with exercise of any annual option, incorporate the current applicable Davis Bacon Wage Decision, which shall become effective on the first day of the option period and shall remain effective for the entire option period. The contractor shall compensate all covered employees at not less than the rates specified on the Wage Decision applicable to the current option period. No contract price adjustment will be made relative to incorporation of the current Wage Decision except as may be required in accordance with Provision _____________, Economic Price Adjustments."

DD-404 Follow-on Contracts. Follow-on contracts should incorporate lessons learned from previous contracts in order to improve the effectiveness of each successive effort. Each installation should ensure thorough documentation of the experiences under the SABER contract. Lessons learned should be made available to SABER personnel and made a part of training. Document preparation and source selection activities can take up to nine months, therefore it is imperative to begin planning and preparation for a follow-on SABER contract early.

DD-13
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Blank Page

DD-14
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-43(sic) January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

SAMPLE COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY SYNOPSIS
SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS (SABER)

ESTIMATED BID OPENING DATE: XX MONTH l99X Contact (identify Contracting Specialist and provide phone number) for solicitation package. The subject acquisition is for a broad range of maintenance, repair, and minor construction work on real property at XXX AFB and its associated sites. The work is required in support of XXX CES, Base Civil Engineer (BCE) activities. The contract will be an indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity type contract and will include a wide variety of individual construction tasks as identified in the Unit Price Book (UPB). During the contract period, the BCE will identify construction tasks required to complete each specific job, and Operational Contracting will negotiate and issue individual delivery orders to the contractor to complete those jobs. The contractor will be required to furnish all materials, equipment, and personnel necessary to manage and accomplish the projects. The contractor will be required to maintain a management office on XXX AFB in order to receive delivery orders and provide other management services related to accomplishing individual jobs. Individual jobs will vary in size and complexity. The jobs will include tasks in a variety of trades, including carpentry, road repair, roofing, excavating, interior electrical, steam fitting, plumbing, sheet metal, painting, demolition, concrete masonry, and welding. The guaranteed contract minimum is $XX,XXX, and the proposed maximum is $XXX,XXX. The average value of SABER delivery orders under the current (or just completed) SABER contract at XXX AFB was $XX,XXX, with a range from $X,XXX to $XXX,XXX. [Otherwise, you might choose to indicate that the statistical average for all SABER delivery orders, Air Force wide, for the period 1990-1993 was $40,000 per year.] The performance period will be a twelve month basic year with 4 twelve-month option years to be executed at the Government s option. The proposed contract is being considered for 100 percent small disadvantaged business (SDB) set-aside. Interested SDB concerns should, as early as possible, but NLT 15 days of this notice, indicate interest in the acquisition by providing evidence of capability to perform and a positive statement of eligibility as a small socially and economically disadvantaged business concern. The Government anticipates significant subcontracting activity under the SABER contract. Due to the size of the solicitation, a $XX fee, payable to XXX, is required for each copy of the solicitation package requested.

DD-15
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Blank Page

DD-16
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

SIMPLIFIED SABER SOURCE SELECTION PLAN

1.0 Introduction. This Source Selection Plan (SSP) has been prepared in accordance with AFFARS APPENDIX BB.

1.1 Program Description and Need. The Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER) contract is designed to provide a flexible and responsive contractual capability to support numerous maintenance, repair, and construction requirements. This is accomplished by awarding an indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity general construction contract to accomplish a large number of projects that cannot be accomplished by in-house resources or are currently undefined. The contract consists of three major elements: (1) detailed task specifications encompassing most aspects of base civil engineering work; (2) units of measure and corresponding prices for each of the specifications and tasks (the Unit Price Book, or UPB); and (3) General and Special Provisions. The contract guarantees a minimum of $XX,XXX and includes an unguaranteed maximum of $XXX,XXX.

Contractors propose on all possible work by quoting separate multiplicative coefficients for standard work hours, nonstandard work hours, and off-site work, if required. These coefficients are in effect for the life of the contract (with option year adjustments typically based on EPA provisions in the contract) and must apply to all tasks contained in the specifications. Work is accomplished through Delivery Orders (DOs) written against the basic contract, and the price for a given element of work is determined by multiplying the coefficient times the total quantities for each prepriced unit of measure.

Current construction contracting procedures require four basic steps: project approval, design, acquisition, and construction. The design and acquisition phases (through contract award) of a minor construction project historically take between six to ten months to accomplish. SABER, once awarded, can reduce this portion of the construction contracting effort to one to three months. This ideally should decrease design and acquisition manhours (and thus cost), enhance quality control, provide more responsive effort, and decrease contract administration overhead and engineering staff workload.

1.2 Background and Contract History. SABER was developed from the Army Job Order Contract which was tested initially in Europe and then employed in the United States by the Corps of Engineers.

1.2.1 Cost and Technical Risk. The use of indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity contracts with fixed price delivery orders (DOs) places the majority of cost risk with the contractor. The degree of technical and cost risk for SABER contracts is less than normal construction contracts for individual projects. This results from the ability of the Government to tailor work requirements, and Government and contractor to hold detailed discussions and site visits, maximizing contractor judgment and innovation. As the actual scope of work and associated prices can be tailored for each job, affordability is maximized in the SABER projects.

1.3 Delivery Requirements

In very general terms, prior to the Government issuing a DO, the contractor, the Government Project Manager, and the Contracting Officer review the project and the contractor prepares a proposal which includes performance time. This is evaluated against a previously-developed independent Government estimate, and a firm price and performance period are negotiated by the Contracting Officer. Upon completion of negotiations, a firm fixed price DO is issued, which becomes a firm obligation against the contract for the specific project.

2.0 Source Selection Organization.

SSA
Wing Commander

SSA Advisors*
Maj Contracting Cmdr
Ms JAG
Col CE Cmdr

SSET Chairperson
Maj Saber

Contract Team Technical Team Admin Support
Ms PCO Capt Project OFficer Sgt Secretary
Mr Buyer Mr Tech Evaluator
Lt Price Analyst Ms PCO
Capt Project Officer

*Include office symbols only for the SSA Advisors.

DD-17
AFAC 92-43(sic) January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

2.1 Source Selection Authority (SSA). The Installation Commander, XXX Air Force Base, will be the SSA for this acquisition and is the approval authority for this SSP.

2.2 Source Selection Evaluation Team (SSET). In accordance with the streamlined procedures in Appendix BB, the Source Selection Advisory Council and the Source Selection Evaluation Board are combined into a single SSET. The SSET will be comprised of both contracting and civil engineering personnel. Formalization of the SSET will be by approval of the Source Selection Plan. Within the SSET organization, there will be an SSET Chairperson as well as contract and technical teams, each with a designated team chief.

2.2.1 Technical Team (TT). The Technical Team will (1) establish the basis for technical evaluation of proposals, (2) develop evaluation criteria, (3) establish the relative order of importance of the criteria and provide this information to the Contract Team for inclusion in the solicitation and various proposal evaluation plans, (4) before receipt of proposals, prepare evaluation standards, (5) after receipt of proposals, rate technical areas, items, and factors from proposals, identify and prepare proposal deficiency reports (DRs) and/or clarification requests (CRs), and (6) prepare narratives for technical evaluation reports.

2.2.2 Contract Team (CT). The Contract Team will (1) prepare the solicitation, (2) conduct pre-proposal briefings, (3) establish procedures to protect contractor proposal information and Government source selection data, (4) conduct negotiations or discussions, and determine contractor responsibility, (5) prepare the award package, and (6) debrief unsuccessful offerors. The Contracting Officer is responsible for issuing DRs and CRs, conducting all written and oral discussions, and making the competitive range determination with the approval of the SSA. (An alternative to creating a chart is to list titles, names, and organizations as follows:) The Contract Team consists of:

Title Name Organization
Team Chief Mr Thomas Decker XX CONS/LGC
Capt Sandy Lewis XX CES/DEEE
Mr Randy Hardy XX CONS/LGCC
Ms Anne Andrews XX CONS/LGCP

2.2.3 Use of Advisors. Government advisors to the SSET organization include MAJCOM representatives (MAJCOM/LGC) and the XX Wing Staff Judge Advocate Office (XX Wing/SJA).

3.0 Presolicitation Activities.

3.1 Publicizing proposed actions and disseminating information. The publicizing of the Government s requirement and basic screening of potential offerors was synopsized on XX Month l99X the Commerce Business Daily. The basic screening requirements specified in the CBD were: (If prescreening was accomplished, list factors here such as at least 5 years experience in construction, valid state contractor s license, etc.)

3.1.1 The initial source list was developed from our current list of general construction contractors. This list also includes several additional general construction contractors who requested copies of the solicitation. The following sources will be sent solicitations:
Acme Builders
Budget Construction
Craftsmen Inc.

3.1.2 Recent experience by the Army Corps of Engineers and other Air Force installations clearly shows that numerous small business firms possess the technical and management capability for this proposed contract. These capabilities will be carefully evaluated during the source selection process and full consideration will be given to set-asides for both SDB and 8(a) program firms.

4.0 Evaluation Procedures

4.1 Development of Standards. Qualitative and quantitative standards will be developed to serve as positive indicators of minimum acceptable performance or compliance with the requirements of the solicitation. Standards, which establish a uniform baseline against which an offeror's solution is compared to determine its value to the Government, and against which proposals are evaluated, will be prepared for the lowest level of subdivision within each area of the specific evaluation criteria set forth in the solicitation. The standards will be prepared by the Technical Team, reviewed by the Contracting Officer, and approved by the Source Selection Evaluation Team Chairperson prior to release of the RFP. (NOTE: The Standards themselves are not included in the SSP or the solicitation in accordance with AFFARS APPENDIX BB. See Attachment 6 of AFFARS APPENDIX BB for examples of Standards.)

4.2 Proposal Rating (Methodology). The color rating methodology identified in AFFARS APPENDIX BB will be used in the evaluation of proposals. The rating system will permit the identification of significant differences, strengths, weaknesses (including deficiencies) and risks associated with each proposal. Color coding will be used at the area item level for the technical evaluation, and will be fully support-

DD-18
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-43(sic) January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

ed by narrative rationale. Cost/price will not be scored and will be separately evaluated by the Contract Team.

4.3 Proposal Analysis Report (PAR). The final Technical and Contract Team reports will be used by the Source Selection Evaluation Team for preparation of a PAR. The SSET, under the guidance of the chairperson, shall prepare a PAR summarizing the strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each proposal. The PAR, together with the Technical and Contracting Team reports, will be sent to the SSA for the final source selection decision.

5.0 Evaluation Criteria.

5.1 Copy the evaluation criteria verbatim from Section M of the solicitation. See Attachment 8 of this guide for sample evaluation factors for award and the development of specific Areas, Items, and Standards for evaluation.) (Tailor this to your specific source selection.)

6.0 Acquisition Strategy

6.1 This acquisition is contemplated to be an indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity general construction contract to accomplish a large number of projects that cannot be accomplished by in-house resources or are currently undefined. (The strategy here should match the acquisition plan strategy.)

7.0 Schedule of Events. The source selection milestone schedule is as follows: (PCO: While only the bolded events and dates are routinely included, establishing your timeline and who is responsible for each event will speed your source selection.)

EVENT DAY OPR
(Est. days-enter date DDMMMYY)
Receive PR -170 PCO
Sources Sought Synopsis Issued -156 PCO/PO
Sources Sought Synopsis Published -150 PCO
Acquisition Strategy Panel Completed - 80 PCO/PO/LGC
Start Acquisition Plan (AP) - 80 PCO/PO
Start Source Selection Plan (SSP) - 80 PO/PCO/Rec
Start Draft RFP/RFP - 80 PCO/PO
Draft RFP to Industry/PreProposal
Conference/Site Visit - 75 PCO/PO
Receive Comments From Industry - 45 PCO/PO
RFP To Contract Writing - 42 PCO/LGCXB
Solicitation Review Board Completed - 28 PCO/PO
RFP To Contract Writing for Changes - 21 PCO/LGCXB
RFP Review Complete - 16 PCO/LGCC/JA
Issue Notice of Contract Action - 16 PCO
Notice of Contract Action Published - 10 PCO
AP Approved - 02 PCO/PO
SSP Approved - 02 PO/Rec
Complete RFP Rel Brief Charts/Exe
Mgt Sum Ltr - 02 Rec/PO/Chair/PCO
RFP Release Briefing to SSA - 01 Rec/PO/Chair/PCO
Exe Mgt Sum Letter Signed by SSA - 01 PCO
RFP Released 0 PCO
Receive Contractor Questions/Comments + 10 PCO/PO
Issue RFP Amendment if required + 15 PCO
Receive Past Performance Data + 15 PCO/Rec
Release Performance Questionnaires + 15 Rec
SSET Orientation Briefing Charts
Completed + 20 Rec/Chair/PO
SSET Orientation Briefing + 21 Rec/Chair/PO
Proposals Received & Checked + 30 PCO/Rec
Request Audits/Preaward Surveys + 31 PCO
Eval Offeror A/Write Narr/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 31 TT
Start Consolidated Lists of
NARR/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 33 Rec
Eval Offeror B/Write Narr/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 33 TT
Eval Offeror C/Write Narr/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 35 TT
Complete Consolid Lists of
NARR/DR/CR/RA/S&W + 36 Rec
Review & Rate Consolid DR/CR/RA/S&W + 40 TT
Issue Ltr For Competitive Range
Briefing + 40 Rec
Prepare Draft Color/S&W Charts + 45 Rec

DD-19
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Receive Performance Information/
Questionnaires + 45 Rec/PRAG
PRAG Assessment Completed + 46 PRAG/Rec
Prepare PRAG Performance Charts + 46 PRAG/Rec
Start Writing PAR + 46 PO/Rec
Start Writing Lessons Learned Report + 46 Rec/PO/Chair
Complete Competitive Range Briefings
Charts + 46 Rec/PO
Competitive Range Briefing Dry Run + 47 TT/Chair/CT/PRAG
Correct Competitive Range Charts + 48 Rec
Coordinate CR/DR with JA & SSO + 48 TT/CT
Competitive Range Briefing To SSA + 49 TT/Chair/CT/PRAG
Release Ltrs To Krs Outside
Competitive Range + 50 PCO
Release Questions To KRS In
Competitive Range + 50 PCO
Prepare Contract(s) + 50 PCO
Receive Kr Responses to questions + 60 PCO
Start Contracts review + 61 PCO
Evaluate Responses to questions + 62 TT/Chair
Prepare Questions for Discussions + 63 PCO/TT/PO
Receive Audits/Preaward Surveys + 71 PCO
Complete Contracts Review + 71 JA/LGCC
Contract Ready For Offeror Signature + 73 PCO
Oral Presentations/Discussions With
Offeror A + 74 TT/CT/Rec
Oral Presentations/Discussions With
Offeror B + 75 TT/CT/Rec
Oral Presentations/Discussions With
Offeror C + 76 TT/CT/Rec
(Discussions Completed) +76 TT/CT/Rec
Request BAFO + 77 PCO
Receive BAFO + 84 PCO
Evaluate BAFO + 86 PCO/TT
Prepare Decision Briefing Charts + 86 Rec/PO
Issue Letters For Decision Briefing + 86 Rec
Complete PAR + 87 Rec/PO
Send 1279 Report + 87 PCO
Prepare Decision Document + 89 Rec/PO
Decision Briefing Dry Run + 91 TT/Chair/CT
Correct Decision Briefing Charts + 92 Rec
Decision Briefing To SSA/Contract Award + 93 TT/Chair/CT
Decision Doc Signed By SSA + 94 TT/Chair
Manual Approval +101 PCO
Contract Award +101 PCO/LGCXB
Notifications to Unsuccessful Offerors +101 PCO
Issue Notice of Contract Award +101 PCO
Postaward Conference w/Successful
Offeror +110 PCO/PO
Debriefings (Upon Request By Offeror) CO/TT
Source Selection Closeout +115 REC/LGCXC
(Period of Performance) DDMMMYY-DDMMMYY

Chair = SSET Chairperson
CT = Contract Team
JA = JAG
PCO = Procuring Contracting Officer
LGC = ASP Chairperson
LGCC = Contract Review Committee
LGCXB = Contract Writing
LGCXC = Competition Advocacy Representative
PRAG = Performance Risk Analysis Group (Past Performance, PreAward Survey team)
PO = Requirements Project Officer
REC = Recorder (The administrative person or team)
SSO = Source Selection Officer (The AFFARS Appendix BB expert)
TT = Technical Team

8.0 Non-Government Advisors.
8.1 There will be no non-Government advisors.

DD-20
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

SAMPLE SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION CRITERIA, INCLUDING
AREAS, FACTORS, AND STANDARDS-- SECTION M

1. Introduction. This section outlines the criteria the Government will use in evaluating the offeror's capabilities and proposals for the SABER contract. The Government will compare each offeror's capabilities and proposal elements against a predetermined set of criteria related to the Government s requirements defined in Section L of the RFP (Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors).

2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

(a) General Considerations (This Section M must match what is in the Source Selection Plan.)

In addition to the evaluation and as part of an integrated assessment of proposals, the Government will consider other salient factors bearing on this acquisition. For example, the offerors' exceptions to terms and conditions, past and present performance, and the capacity and capability to perform the requirements (PCO: Remember this issue may be determined by the SBA in the case of small businesses) of the Request for Proposal (RFP).

The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based on the offeror's present and past performance as it relates to the probability of successfully accomplishing the proposed effort. When assessing performance risk, the Government will use performance data to evaluate the technical and management and cost areas listed below. Performance Risk is a structured treatment of past and present performance used as a general consideration. Performance risk is (coequal or less, etc) in relative importance to the color rating and proposal risk assessment. Offeror's past and present performance on recent, similar Government and commercial contracts will be evaluated.

(b) General Basis for Award

This is a competitive source selection which will be conducted IAW AFFARS APPENDIX BB. Award will be made to the offeror who the Government determines can best accomplish the necessary work to satisfy the objectives and requirements set forth in the RFP in a manner most advantageous to the Government.

The Government will evaluate all information furnished by offerors, including proposals, responses to questions (oral and written), oral presentations, and best and final offers (BAFOs).
Each offeror's proposal will be evaluated against the following two areas listed in descending order of importance: Technical and Management, and Cost as delineated in Section M of the RFP. The Technical and Management area will be rated in two manners: a color/adjectival rating and a proposal risk rating. The color rating depicts how well the offeror's proposal meets the evaluation standards and solicitation requirements. Proposal risk assesses the risk associated with the offeror's proposed effort as it relates to accomplishing the requirements of this solicitation.

The Technical and Management area will be afforded primary emphasis in the evaluation. The Offeror's Technical and Management volume must convey to the Government that the offeror is capable; possesses sufficient technical expertise and experience; possesses sufficient resources; and is able to plan, organize, and use those resources in a coordinated and timely fashion such that technical requirements will be achieved and costs will be controlled.

Although the Cost area is second in importance, it will contribute substantially to the source selection decision, and will be evaluated as to completeness, realism, and reasonableness. (Revise the following sentences if adequate price competition is not anticipated). The contracting officer has determined that there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Therefore, a limited amount of cost or pricing data will initially be requested, however, the Government reserves the right to request certified cost and pricing data at any time during the source selection and at the discretion of the contracting officer. After evaluation of the Technical and Management area has been completed and rankings have been established, cost to the Government will be compared against these rankings to determine the combination most advantageous to the Government. Unrealistically low price or cost estimates, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition. The Government reserves the right to award a contract to other than the low offeror.

BAFOs may be required in determining the award of the contract resulting from this RFP, however, the Government reserves the right to award contracts without discussions or opportunity for proposal revision, in which case, BAFOs will not be required. Offerors are advised that unsupported BAFO changes may be penalized in the overall proposal evaluation, and an otherwise acceptable proposal could be placed in jeopardy.

The Government will assess two types of risk as part of the source selection process: proposal risk and performance risk. Proposal risks assessed will be those associated with cost, schedule, and the offeror's proposed effort as it relates to accomplishing the statement of work. Performance risks assessed will be those associated with the offeror's present and past performance as it relates to the probability of successfully accomplishing the proposed effort. When assessing performance risk, the Government will collect data and focus its evaluation on

DD-21
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

the offeror's ability to perform against the Technical and Management, and Cost areas. Pre-Award Surveys may be conducted as part of this source selection. Results of Pre-Award Surveys will be evaluated to determine each offeror's ability to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

(1) Technical and Management Area

(i) Assessment Criteria. The following criteria below will be used to evaluate the offeror's responses under each area and factor.

The offeror must:

(a) Provide a complete response to each requirement of the RFP, and
(b) Clearly state and justify any exceptions and any variations to the requirements.

Note that a lower rating will be assigned if:
(1) The offeror merely indicates compliance without stating how he will comply.
(2) Requirements are disregarded, or
(3) Requirements are exceeded without sufficient explanation and justification.

(c) Exhibit a clear understanding of the processes required to satisfy the SOW requirements.
(d) Display knowledge of the requirement including limitations, applicability, and availability to support the proposed effort, and
(e) Present a clear, concise, logical plan and fully justify his approach for achieving requirement objectives.

(ii) Specific Criteria. The Technical and Management area is divided into the following areas and factors, which are listed in descending order of importance. (These factors and subfactors are to be the same as those addressed in Section L.)

Project Management Ability Area
Key Project Management Staff Factor
Quality Control Plan Factor
Financial Resources Factor
Support/Interface with Home Office/Company Staff Factor

Subcontracting support Capability Area
Subcontract Management Factor
Identification of Key Subcontractors Factor
Purchasing System/Level of Subcontracting Factor

Project Execution and Technical Capability Area
Key Technical Support Staff (including personnel credentials) Factor
Level of Overall Effort in the Execution of the Demonstration Project Factor
Number of Alternatives Proposed (Demonstration Project) Factor
Cost Effectiveness of Decisions/Assumptions (Demonstration Project) Factor
Completeness of Priced Listings (Demonstration Project) Factor

Experience Area

(2) Price/Cost.

The cost proposal will be evaluated for compliance with RFP instructions, completeness, realism, and reasonableness. Cost past performance will not be rated, however, it will be a General Consideration in the evaluation. The evaluation of price will be based primarily on each offeror's proposed coefficient(s). Financial data will be requested to support the proposed coefficient(s) and to assess the offeror's understanding and ability to meet financial requirements such as bonding and plan for covering initial cash flow deficits. The Government does not envision the need for a formal DCAA audit or field pricing assistance, as a significant amount of the total price to the Government will be a commonly-directed amount through the application of the price book. Price will not be rated and color coded as are technical evaluation criteria. The evaluation in this area will be geared towards determining the offeror's overall understanding of the program and adequate coverage of operating expenses and bonding.

DD-22
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Sample Proposal Preparation Instructions--Section L
(Note: This section must be the same as guidance and instructions to the evaluation team)

(1) General
(i) All proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation.
(ii) The contracting officer has determined that there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Therefore, only a limited amount of cost data is required in the initial proposals. Upon examination of the initial proposals (offers), the contracting officer will review his determination. If, in the contracting officer s opinion, adequate price competition exists at that time no additional cost information, except for Best and Final Offers, will be elicited and certification under FAR 15.804-4 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists all offerors will be required to prepare, submit, and certify cost or pricing data as in FAR 15.804-2.

(iii) The following material will be submitted:

TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT
COST
CONTRACT FORMS
PERFORMANCE

(iv) Submitted materials will be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

(A) Requirements of the RFP and SOW, and CLINs contained therein;
(B) Government standards and regulations pertaining to this SOW/PWS; and
(C) Evaluation areas and factors for Award in Section M of this RFP.
(D) No cost data will be included in the technical materials. Offerors shall provide cross-reference matrices in each volume which:
(E) Format of the above proposal volumes (and any resulting Clarification Requests (CRs) and Deficiency Reports (DRs), should the government decide to enter into discussions) shall be as follows: (This type of paragraph is optional, but make the evaluation easier.)
(a) All typing (including that on charts, graphs, and tables, etc.) shall be no more than thirty six lines of text per page and no more than 100 characters per line. Two columns of text per page is acceptable to facilitate ease of reading for the evaluators.
(b) Elaborate format, color representations, and binding are not desirable. Three ring binders or soft covers with screw type aluminum binding posts are preferred.
(c) Page margins shall be a minimum of 1 top, bottom, and each side.
(d) Proposal pages shall not contain offeror identification marks, such as logos.

(2) Technical and Management

(i) Section 1 - Introduction and Summary

The Government will not evaluate this section which is limited to three pages. This section is not included in the page limit for the Technical and Management Volume. It should contain, in no more three pages, a concise summary of your proposed approach to the SABER effort. (Optional)

(ii) Section 2

a. Project Management Ability. This area will address the offeror's management organization, to include a description of functions, authorities, and credentials of key management personnel. This area will cover the proposed quality control plan; demonstrated financial capability to provide required bonding and coverage of operating expenses; and support and interface with the company or home office. The factors under this area, in descending order of importance, are:

Factor 1 Key Project Management Staff
Factor 2 Quality Control Plan
Factor 3 Financial Resources
Factor 4 Support/Interface with Home Office/Company Staff

b. Subcontracting support Capability. This area will address the offeror's policies, procedures, and functional responsibilities for selection and management of all subcontractors. The offeror will be required to describe its purchasing system, subcontract management

DD-23
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

system, and to identify key subcontractors it plans to use for various major disciplines. The Factors, in descending order of importance, are as follows:

Factor 1 Subcontract Management
Factor 2 Identification of Key Subcontractors
Factor 3 Purchasing System/Level of Subcontracting
In order to minimize adverse impacts on local business(es) due to consolidating numerous projects under one contract, the Government will evaluate the offeror's proposed degree of subcontracting versus performance of actual construction work by in-house employees. The Government will evaluate the offeror's proposed use of small, small disadvantaged, and 8(a) subcontractors.

c. Project Execution and Technical Capability. This area will address each offeror's technical staff and ability to complete projects under the contract. The Government will evaluate at least one project that has been identified for award under the SABER program for a demonstration of technical capability. The specific project description will be provided to each offeror to propose a design concept, design analysis with calculations, list of assumptions, list of priced items from the price guide, and an overall proposal of project execution. The Government will consider the following Factors under this area, in descending order of importance, in evaluating the proposals for the demonstration project:

Factor 1 Key Technical Support Staff (including personnel credentials);
Factor 2 Level of Overall Effort in the Execution of the Demonstration Project
Factor 3 Number of Alternatives Proposed (Demonstration Project)
Factor 4 Cost Effectiveness of Decisions/Assumptions (Demonstration Project)
Factor 5 Completeness of Priced Listings (Demonstration Project)

d. Experience. This area addresses each offeror's related construction management experience within the past five years. The Government will assess the quality and extent of each offeror's multi-project and multi-discipline experience. The Government will use information submitted by the offeror and other sources of information such as other Federal Government offices and better business bureaus.

(Note: List each of the identified factors and subfactors as a section and subsection respectively. For each factor and subfactor, explain in a brief and concise manner, what key areas the contractor should address in his proposal (The factors and subfactors must be the same as set forth in Section M of the RFP and the SSP)).

(4) Cost Volume The evaluation of price will be based primarily on each offeror's proposed coefficient(s). Financial data will be requested to support the proposed coefficient(s) and to assess the offeror's understanding and ability to meet financial requirements such as bonding and plan for covering initial cash flow deficits. The Government does not envision the need for a formal DCAA audit or field pricing assistance, as a significant amount of the total price to the Government will be a commonly-directed amount through the application of the price book. While price will not be rated and color coded as are technical evaluation criteria, it will be evaluated by the Contract Team in terms of completeness, reasonableness and realism. The evaluation in this area will be geared towards determining the offeror's overall understanding of the program and adequate coverage of operating expenses and bonding.

(5) Contract Forms (Revise the following words to include your desired instructions)
Include the following data, in this volume, in the format indicated. Designate on the volume cover the proposal copy containing the original, executed copy of the RFP.

(i) Section 1
(A) Proposal forwarding letter, if any.
(B) A complete copy of this RFP (through Section M, less attachments) with the original signature of an official authorized to contractually bind the offeror in block 16 of the face page. The offeror must complete the following sections within the RFP and model contract.
(a) Part I, Section A.
(b) Part I, Section B.
(c) Part IV, Section K - Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offeror.
(ii) Section 2
Titles, addresses, and telephone numbers of cognizant Government Contract Administration and Defense Contract Audit Agency offices (if known).
(iii) Section 3
Any exceptions to, or deviations from, any of the clauses or special contract requirements along with justification therefore.
(iv) Section 4
If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement.

DD-24
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

(v) Section 5
Any information, excluding cost, which does not properly belong within the other proposal volumes.

(vi) Section 6
Include in this section, the information required by the RFP for which there is insufficient space in the requiring clauses or certifications.

(6) Volume Performance

(i) Offerors are advised that Evaluation Factors for Award, Section M of this RFP, includes performance risk as a structured treatment of presenting past and present performance as a general consideration. Offerors will present the data in paragraph (iii) below, for themselves, and for any proposed division, subcontractor, or teaming contractor whose effort on this contract will significantly influence performance of the proposed effort. Data presented will be limited to two (2) pages per contract described and is due 15 days after RFP issue date.
(ii) Relevant past performance data is any information considered by the offeror to be relevant in demonstrating ability to perform the proposed effort. In developing such information, offerors are requested to focus on the areas and factors identified in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, to be assessed for performance risk.

(iii) Relevant past performance data to be supplied:
(A) A list of all relevant contract in the following format:
(a) Contract number
(b) Total dollar value
(c) Procuring agency
(d) Title of contract
(e) Government Program Manager (name, address, and telephone number)
(f) Description of program/product (including discussion as to its relevancy to this acquisition)
(g) PCO and ACO (name, address, and telephone number)
(h) Period of performance
(i) Type of contract

(B) A synopsis of the relevant performance, segregated by areas, which occurred under each contract. As a minimum, the following areas should be addressed:
(a) Technical and Management:
(1) (Enter any special issues)
(2) Identified new risks/problems as they occurred
(3) Provided alternate approaches to problems
(4) Initiative to solve problems
(5) Top management participation (especially during problems)
(6) Developed realistic schedules.
(7) Met original schedules.
(8) Responsiveness to contract change/direction
(9) Cooperation with administrative/program officer after contract award, and
(10) Subcontractors adherence to schedule

(b) Cost:

Were there any cost overruns/underruns, cost growths and/or schedule extensions? If so, were they attributable to the Government or the contractor?

(C) Offerors are encouraged to cite and explain any corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence of past performance which they consider substandard.

(D) (Enter any desired requests for present performance problems that the contractor might have discovered).

DD-25
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Blank Page

DD-26
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

SAMPLE STANDARDS

The following are provided as sample Areas, Factors, and Standards, and are not meant to be all-inclusive. Each installation must tailor these items, making them as specific as possible, based on local conditions and circumstances.

AREA: Project Management Ability FACTOR: Key Project Management Staff
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides names and credentials of key staff members, and identifies the relationships between and authority delegated to management personnel.
a. Provides organization diagram showing clear lines of authority from Program Manager to subcontracting management, including site superintendence and quality control
b. Assigns staff holding engineering degrees to this contract (head of staff minimum)
c. Provides the level of authority delegated to staff members (senior staff member to have on-site decision making authority as a minimum)

AREA: Project Management Ability FACTOR: Quality Control Plan
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Details the type of personnel to be assigned to each work discipline (must be appropriate; i.e., electrical technician supervising electrical work).
2. Provides the number of jobs to be assigned to each technician (no more than 15 per person, with 6 being typical).
3. Details how quality problems will be documented and resolved (logical, effective, expedient).
4. Details how often work will be inspected (frequency of at least once per day per job).
5. Details how trend analysis will be accomplished to identify poor performing subcontractors, including appropriate corrective action (management tools, methods, documentation).
6. Details how interface with Government inspectors will be accomplished (weekly update as minimum).

AREA: Project Management Ability FACTOR: Financial Resources
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Demonstrates the capability to be bonded to the degree required in the RFP, Section X, paragraph X (page X).
2. Demonstrates the capability to cover the initial cash flow until enough delivery orders are processed to reimburse these expenses.

AREA: Project Management Ability FACTOR: Support/Interface with Home Office/Company Staff
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides operating procedures and guidelines for home office interface; identifies support to be provided by the home office and/or company staff to the on-site office (must be realistic, responsive).

AREA: Subcontracting Support Capability FACTOR: Subcontract Management
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Describes policies and procedures for subcontractor management, including surveillance, quality control, and scheduling (may be included as part of the Quality Control Plan previously described).
2. Shows capability for quick and normal response using subcontractors through pre-established or intended agreements/contracts with subcontractors (normal time frame for identification, scoping, estimating, negotiating, and start of actual performance is estimated to be four (4) weeks).

AREA: Subcontracting Support Capability FACTOR: Identification of Key Subcontractors
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:

DD-27
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

1. Identifies the subcontractors for each major functional discipline (electrical, mechanical, structural, painting, pavements, landscaping, roofing, plumbing, HVAC, etc.).

2. Documents the experience/capabilities of each subcontractor identified as supporting the contract (including supply sources as well).
a. Lists previous experience with the subcontractor
b. Lists other jobs performed by the subcontractor
c. Documents volume of work or supplies handled

AREA: Subcontracting Support Capability FACTOR: Purchasing System/Level of Subcontracting
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides the proposed level of subcontracting and in-house work accomplishment (estimate minimum of 90% of work to be subcontracted).
2. Describes method and criteria, adequate to meet the requirements of the contract, used to choose subcontractors.
a. Previous experience and present capabilities
b. Quality of previous jobs (references)

AREA: Project Execution and Technical Capability FACTOR: Key Technical Support Staff
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Indicates the support staff dedicated for this contract on-site and/or at the home office.
a. Minimum functions must include clerical, inspection (quality control), drafting, technical design/planning staff personnel
b. Skill level similar to civil engineering superintendents for inspectors; similar to civil engineering planners for the design staff
2. Indicates availability of design capability (A/E support) if design is to be performed by other than in-house resources.
a. List of A/E firms must indicate capability to perform civil, mechanical, and electrical work to the degree required under this contract
b. List of registered Professional Engineers must show capability and availability of these persons/firms consistent with the type of work required under this contract

AREA: Project Execution and Technical Capability FACTOR: Level of Overall Effort in the Execution of the Demonstration Project
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Shows that the appropriate engineer (discipline and skill level) was consulted on the project (paving engineer for paving projects, electrical technician on electrical work, etc.).
2. Provides drawing details showing all aspects of the work to be executed with a description of materials to be used and all proper dimensions shown.
3. Provides calculations to support the proposal for the project (asphalt depth on paving projects; structural capabilities and lighting levels as required; etc.).
4. Shows the request for existing drawings and/or a site visit has been made.
5. Proposal includes all necessary disciplines (pavements and markings for resurfacing projects; structural engineering, sheet metal, protective coating, electrical, floor covering, etc., for other projects, as appropriate).

AREA: Project Execution and Technical Capability FACTOR: Number of Alternatives Proposed (Demonstration Project)
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides at least one other alternative to the Government s proposed method of accomplishment.
2. Shows that alternatives are within comparable cost ranges (within 10% of estimated cost) unless unusual circumstances are highlighted by the offeror justifying any such differences.
3. Shows alternatives are reasonable, maintainable, and cost effective.

AREA: Project Execution and Technical Capability FACTOR: Cost Effectiveness of Decisions/Assumptions (Demonstration Project)
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)

DD-28
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides comparisons on cost of various materials/alternatives.
2. Provides maintainability considerations in the comparisons (floor carpeting vs. tile, glass vs Plexiglas, concrete vs asphalt, paint vs tape, etc.).
3. Provides initial cost and life cycle cost considerations.

AREA: Project Execution and Technical Capability FACTOR: Completeness of Priced Listings (Demonstration Project)
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides at least 95% of all price listed items contained in the Government estimate.
2. Provides reasons for significant or unusual differences due to Government oversight or a better offeror's proposal.
3. Provides the listing in the format provided in the sample project.
4. Provides a listing that is clearly followed and flows in a logical order; the listing should group similar types of work, such as grouping all pavement work together.

AREA: Technical Capability FACTOR: Cost Effectiveness Decisions (Demonstration Project)
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Provides cost comparisons for various materials/alternatives.
2. Provides maintainability considerations in the comparisons (carpeting vs tile, glass vs Plexiglas, concrete vs asphalt, paint vs tape, etc.).
3. Provides initial cost and life cycle cost considerations.

AREA: Technical Capability FACTOR: Technical Support Staff (Demonstration Project)
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal:
1. Indicates support staff is dedicated for this contract on site and/or at the head office.
a. Minimum functions must include clerical, inspectors (quality control), drafting, technical design/planning staff
b. Skill level similar to civil engineering superintendents for the inspectors, and similar to civil engineering planners for the design staff
2. Indicates availability of design capability (A/E support) if design is to be accomplished by other than in-house personnel.
a. List of A/E firms must indicate capability of performing civil, mechanical, and electrical work to the degree required by this contract
b. List of registered Professional Engineers must show capability and availability of these persons/firms consistent with the type of work required by this contract

AREA: Experience FACTOR: None
SECTION M REFERENCE:
DESCRIPTION: (Add goal of this factor. Why is it a key discriminator?)
STANDARD: The standard is met when the proposal provides data on previous experience to include:
1. At any one time within the past five years, management of over 20 projects, valued at over $20,000 each, at the same time.
2. At any one time within the past five years, management of over 10 multi-discipline projects, valued at over $25,000 each, at the same time (may be included in the 20 identified above).
3. Over the past five years, management of an average of 10 projects at the same time.

Note: that data must include contract number, period of performance, description, dollar amount, and point of contact with the agency awarding the contract. Lack of prior experience due to offeror being a new company will not result in a negative rating, but would be considered in the assessment of risk.

DD-29
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Blank Page

DD-30
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

SAMPLE SABER COST COMPARISON

I. PROJECT TITLE: Paint Warehouse Interior, Bldg xxxx, (Insert Project Number)

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (Insert brief description of scope of work including base priority for insertion into RPMC program.)

III. TRADITIONAL COST ESTIMATE: (Insert traditional estimate amount from attachment 1)

IV. SABER COST ESTIMATE: (Insert SABER estimate amount from attachment 2)

V. COST COMPARISON:

Traditional Cost: $333,980.00 [example FIGURES]
SABER Cost: $283,109.36 [example FIGURES]

Difference $50,870.64

VI. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: (Insert comments and discussion pertinent to the cost comparison analysis: do not duplicate your justification letter in this area)

Submitted:

Name, Rank/Grade, USAF
SABER Project Manager

Certified: Coordinated:

Name, Rank, USAF Name, Rank, USAF
Base Civil Engineer Chief, Operational Contracting Division
(Or appropriate contracting
representative)

2 Atchs
1. Traditional Cost Estimate
Calculations
2. SABER Cost Estimate
Calculations

DD-31
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

TRADITIONAL COST ESTIMATE CALCULATIONS [EXAMPLE]

Description U/I Quantity U/Cost Amount** Basis for Estimate
Ceiling corr.
metal SF 130140 $1.25 $162,675 Experience*
Overhead Door
(41 ea.) SF 12000 $1.08 $ 12,960 Experience*
Vinyl Walls SF 29510 $1.42 $ 41,904 Means
Hardboard
Walls SF 9312 $0.41 $ 3,817 Means
Beams &
Columns SF 6384 $1.25 $ 7,980 Experience*
Piping LF 3000 $2.64 $ 7,920 Means
Trusses, Metal SF 42600 $1.25 $ 53,250 Experience*
Lift Rental MO 3 $2000 $ 6,000 Means
Repl Wall
Panels SF 1270 $3.02 $ 3,835 Means
Surf Prep SF 224256 $0.15 $ 33.638 Experience*
Total $333,980

*Estimated based on previously awarded, competitively bid, contracts for the same or similar item.

*Include overhead and profit in all amounts shown regardless of source.

DD-32
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

SABER COST ESTIMATE CALCULATIONS (EXAMPLE)

A. Project Summary:

PrePriced Items: Total Direct Cost (Regular Time) $211,944.25
Multiplier (Regular Time) 1.20
Total Cost (Regular Time) $254,333.10

Total Direct Cost (Premium Time) 0.00
Multiplier (Premium Time) 1.30
Total Cost (Premium Time) 0.00

NonPriced Items: Total Direct Cost (Regular Time) $ 23,980.22
Multiplier ,(sic) (Regular Time) 1.20
Total Cost (Regular Time) $ 28,776.26

Total Direct Cost (Premium Time) 0.00
Multiplier (Premium Time) 1.30
Total Cost (Premium Time) 0.00

Total Project Cost $283,109.36

B. PrePriced Items

1. Summary:

Basic Suffix Description/Comments Quantity U/I U/Cost Total
072121009 Demo Insulation 250.00 SF $0.27 $67.50
072121009 Replace Insulation 250.00 SF 1.32 330.00
096511001 Hardboard Adhesive 1020.00 SF 1.87 1,907.40
099101401 Paint Overhead Doors 12000.00 SF 0.61 7,320.00
099101906 Paint Trusses S0640.00 SF 0.55 27,852.00
099102002 Paint Piping 3000.00 LF 0.97 2,910.00
099102131 15% Spot Prime Ceiling 15675.00 SF 0.45 7,053.75
099102131 First Coat Ceiling 104500.00 SF 0.45 47,025.00
099102131 Second Coat Ceiling 104500.00 SF 0.45 47,025.00
099102132 15% Spot Prime Joist 17.00 TON 68.08 1,157.36
099102132 First Coat Joist 114.50 TON 68.08 7,795.16
099102132 Second Coat Joist 114.50 TON 68.08 7,795.16
099102133 15% Spot Prime Columns 2.60 TON 329.07 855.58
099102133 First Coat Column 17.50 TON 329.07 5,758.72
099102133 Second Coat Column 17.50 TON 329.07 5,758.72
099102133 15% Spot Prime Door Frame 4.00 TON 329.07 1,316.28
099102133 First Coat Door Frame 26.00 TON 329.07 8,555.82
099102133 Second Coat Door Frame 26.00 TON 329.07 8,555.82
099201211 Paint Hardboard Panel 9312.00 SF 0.59 5,494.08
nss201211 Paint Vinyl Ins Cvring 29510.00 SF 0.59 17,410.90

Total Direct Cost $211,944.25
Multiplier 1.20
Extended Total PrePriced Items $254,333.10

DD-33
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

2. Detail:

Item Quantity U/I Unit Cost Total

07212 Rigid Insulation
1000 Rigid Board Insulation
1009 11/2 Urethane, R10.7 250.00 SF 0.27 67.50
*** 19072.1001 Demolition

07212 Rigid Insulation
1000 Rigid Board Insulation
1009 11/2 Urethane, R10.7 250.00 SF 1.32 350.00
*** 2001 For Vapor Barrier
Integral W/Insulation
*** 2004 For Factory Painted
on Qne Surface

09651 Cementitous Underlayment.
1001 Latex Underlayment
1/8 in. Thick 1020.00 SF $1.87 1907.40

[*~******CONTINUE FOR ALL UPB ITEMS********]

Total Direct Cost $211,944.25
Multiplier 1.20
Extended Total PrePriced Items $254,333.10

C. NonPriced Items Summary

Description/Comments Quantity U/I U/Cost Total
Repl Hardboard Panels 1020.00 SF $1.70 $1,734.00
Surface Preparation 205962.00 SF 0.10 20,596.20
Taping 9706.00 SF $0.17 $1,650.02

Total Direct Cost $23,980.22
Multiplier 1.20
Extended Total NonPriced Items $28,776.26

D. SABER Totals:
PrePriced Items (Regular Time) $254,333.10
PrePriced Items (Premium Time) $ 0.00
NonPriced Items (Regular Time) $ 27,776.26
NonPriced Items (Premium Time) $ 0.00

Total $283,109.36

DD-34
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Sample Clause for SABER Economic Price Adjustment (EPA)

(a) Coefficient(s) for SABER options under this contract shall be adjusted annually to recognize variations in labor, equipment and material costs as set forth below.

(b) The Market Trends Construction Cost Index (CCI) for the city of (insert where the work is to be performed) as published in the McGraw Hill publication ENR (Engineering News Record) shall be used to determine adjustments to the contract coefficients for options under this contract. To determine the amount of adjustment, the contracting officer will calculate the change in the index appearing in the issue of ENR published during the month prior to the effective date of the option from _______ (the Contracting Officer shall enter the most recently published index at the time of initial contract award). Eighty percent (80%) of this variation will be applied to _______ (the Contracting Officer shall enter the coefficient for the initial period of the contract). If the publication of the index should be discontinued, the parties to the contract will negotiate a replacement index or new contract provision. If a replacement index or contract provision cannot be agreed upon, the contracting officer may unilaterally determine the contract adjustment method, and the contractor may dispute the determination under the Disputes Clause. Adjustments to option year contract coefficients shall be determined in accordance with the following formulae

(1) To calculate the new coefficient use
C = C_i * f
Where--
C i-= New Coefficient;
f = Adjustment Factor; and
C_i= Contract pricing coefficient at contract award.

(2) To calculate the Adjustment Factor use
f = ((CCI_c - CCI_i) ¸CCI_i) _* 80% + 1
Where--
CCIc = the ENR index for the option; and
CCIi = the ENR index for the initial contract award.

(c) Adjustment calculations for second and subsequent option years shall each be based on the contract coefficient for the initial contract period.
DD-35
AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995 AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM

Sample EPA Calculations

EPA Coefficient-Index Matrix

Action ENR Index Adjustment Factor Coefficient

Contract Award 110.0 N/A 1.03

Option 1 115.4 1.039 1.07

Option 2 130.2 1.147 1.18

Option 3 125.1 1.110 1.14

Option 4 100.0 .928 .96

Note: Round calculation results as done in this example.

EPA Calculations

Column 2 - ENR Indices for the options are taken from the issue of the McGraw Hill publication ENR published during the month prior to the effective date of the option. The ENR Index for the Contract Award is the most recent ENR index published during the month prior to initial contract award.

Column 3- Adjustment Factor Calculation

Option 1 115.4 - 110.0 * 80% = +.039 + 1 = 1.039
110.0

Option 2 130.2 - 110.0 * 80% = +1.47 + 1 = 1.147
110.0

Option 3 125.1 - 110.0 * 80% = +.110 + 1 = 1.110
110.0

Option 4 100.0 - 110.0 * 80% = -.072 + 1 = .928
110.0

Column 4 - Adjusted Coefficient Calculation

Option 1 = 1.03 * (1.039) = 1.07

Option 2 = 1.03 * (1.147) = 1.18

Option 3 = 1.03 * (1.110) = 1.14

Option 4 = 1.03 * (.928) = .96

DD-36
AIR FORCE FAR SUPPLEMENT AFAC 92-44 January 15, 1995
APPENDIX DD--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION OF BASE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM, ATTACHMENT 8

DELIVERY ORDER FILE CHECKLIST

CONTRACT NO: DELIVERY ORDER NO: DATE ORDER AWARDED:

CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR: AMOUNT OF THIS ORDER:

YES NO

1. Does file contain properly approved and
classified work request (AF Form 332)?

2. Are sufficient funds available and
documentation contained within the file?

3. Is the memorandum for record of site
visit adequate?

4. Does the independent government cost
estimate contain:

(a) The effort as set forth in the RFP?

(b) Adequate pricing data for determining
the reasonableness of the contractor's proposal?

5. Does the file contain statement of work
revisions for changes as a result of the site
visit or negotiations?

6. Does the file contain record of
Installation Commander approval and supporting
documentation, if DO or NPIs exceed limitations?

7. Does the contractor's proposal contain:

(a) Proposal for the scope as set forth
in the request for proposal?

(b) Pricing by line item in accordance
with the SABER UPB?

(d) Method of construction?

(e) Other items as set forth in the request for proposal?

8. Does the file contain an adequate technical
evaluation?

9. Does the Record of Negotiations provide
sufficient detail the negotiated variances
in price, period of performance, quantities,
statement of work changes, negotiated
methodology, etc.?)

10. Is DD Form 1155 complete and does it contain--

(a) Accounting and appropriation data?

(b) Scope of work?

(d) Any mandatory methodologies?

(e) Negotiated NPIs?

DD-37

Blank Page

FAR

Favorite

X

afa92_44