# DLAD PGI PART 11 – DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS

- DLAD PGI PART 11 – DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS

- PGI SUBPART 11.2 – USING AND MAINTAINING REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTS

- PGI 11.274-2(b)(2)(ii) Determination and findings.

- PGI SUBPART 11.3 - ACCEPTABLE MATERIAL

- PGI 11.302-92 Obtaining and Assessing Adequacy of Traceability Documentation.

- PGI SUBPART 11.4 – DELIVERY OR PERFORMANCE SCHEDULES

- PGI 11.402(a)(S-90) Expedite process.

DLAD PGI PART 11 – DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS

PGI SUBPART 11.2 – USING AND MAINTAINING REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTS

PGI 11.274-2(b)(2)(ii) Determination and findings.

The contracting officer will forward copies of the determination and findings to the DoD item unique identification (IUID) program office at the mailing address at DFARS 211.274-2(b)(ii), and to the DLA Acquisition Policy and Systems Division, J71.

PGI SUBPART 11.3 - ACCEPTABLE MATERIAL

(Revised August 3, 2012 through PROCLTR 2012-45)

PGI 11.302-92 Obtaining and Assessing Adequacy of Traceability Documentation.

(a) General.

(1) It is critically important for contracting officers to be able to confirm a documentation trail from the supplier to the approved manufacturer. Accordingly, contracting officers shall request traceability documentation whenever additional information is needed to ensure product conformance and whenever they have any reason to be suspicious that offerors or contractors may be attempting to defraud the Government.

(2) It is not possible to identify all indicators of risk. This PGI is intended to provide information based on past experience to assist contracting officers in identifying suspicious circumstances.

(b) Traceability documentation shall be obtained and associated actions shall be taken as specified in this section, when—

(1) The offeror provided a quote as traceability documentation prior to award.

(i) It is common practice for independent distributors and brokers, who do not keep inventory, to procure the offered product only after they are awarded the contract. Under such circumstances, the offeror typically furnishes a quote from the approved source or an authorized distributor, which is considered an acceptable form of traceability prior to award. When this has occurred, the post-award acquisition specialist shall ask the contractor to provide full traceability documentation demonstrating the complete line of ownership before the product is shipped.

(ii) If the awardee does not have full traceability information, the acquisition specialist shall contact the product specialist to recommend that product verification testing be invoked in accordance with the clause at 52.246-9004, Product Verification Testing (PVT).

(2) Potential indicators of risk are present. Potential indicators of fraud include, but are not limited to, the following:

(i) The supplier has no past DLA history;

(ii) The price offered is lower than price of approved source or its authorized distributor;

(iii) The price offered is out of line with other quotes or past pricing history;

(iv) The price offered for new product is lower than price offered for surplus material;

(v) The manufacturer’s contractor and Government entity (CAGE) code identified in offer differs from CAGE code of approved manufacturing source in solicitation;

(vi) The offeror/contractor is reluctant or unable to provide traceability documentation;

(vii) The offeror’s/contractor’s phone number, address, e-mail, or other vital information is missing, invalid, or suspicious; and/or

(viii) The contractor invoices without delivering the supplies.

(3) Protest is received questioning awardee’s ability or intention to supply exact product at price awarded.

(i) The acquisition specialist shall immediately request traceability documentation from the awardee upon receipt of a protest when the protestor has questioned the awardee's ability or intention of supplying the exact product at the price awarded.

(ii) By immediately requesting traceability, the response back to the protestor from the cognizant office of counsel will include the status/disposition of the award, based on the information received from the awardee.

(4) The contractor requests a modification changing the part number or other information related to its exact product representation.

(i) The post-award acquisition specialist shall carefully evaluate any requests for modifications from a contractor requesting a change to the part number or any other information pertaining to the exact product representation in its original quote.

(ii) The post-award acquisition specialist shall place any contractor that misrepresented its exact product status on the DCRL as special attention reason code Q and provide a detailed explanation as to how the contractor has misrepresented its product in the remarks field to alert pre-award acquisition specialists to require additional information from that supplier upon receipt of a quote on future procurements.

(iii) Placing the contractor on the Defense contractor review list (DCRL) as special attention reason code Q will ensure the contractor will not receive any procurement automated contract evaluation (PACE) awards without a manual review by the second look team. In most cases, the second look team will reject the file from PACE and refer to the manual acquisition specialist.

(c) Recourse when adequate traceability documentation not provided.

(1) If traceability documentation is requested prior to award and the offeror fails to provide sufficient information within the time frame requested, the pre-award acquisition specialist shall consider the offer technically unacceptable and make award to the offeror next in line for award.

(2) If traceability documentation is requested after award and the contractor fails to provide sufficient information within the time frame requested, this is grounds for cancellation of the award.

(3) If it is not in the Government’s best interest to cancel the award, the pre-award acquisition specialist may contact the product specialist to recommend that product verification testing be invoked in accordance with the clause at 52.246-9004, Product Verification Testing (PVT).

(d) Assessing adequacy of traceability documentation.

(1) The contracting officer, at his or her sole discretion, determines the acceptability and sufficiency of traceability documentation or any other evidence of product authenticity. Therefore, the contracting officer may request whatever additional documentation he or she deems reasonably necessary to support a determination that the identity of the offered product and its manufacturing source has been adequately documented.

(2) When reviewing traceability documentation, the contracting officer shall read the entire document and check to ensure—

(i) The letterhead is correct and/or unaltered;

(ii) Signatures are legible and provided by authorized personnel;

(iii) There is no evidence of alteration by cutting and pasting/white out/scanning (see paragraph (e) of this section);

(iv) There are no missing documents;

(v) Dates are current;

(vi) Phone numbers are accurate;

(vii) Font styles are consistent;

(viii) There are no handwritten annotations on a typed document;

(ix) Line items reflect correct part numbers and quantities;

(x) Documents do not appear to have been reproduced repeatedly;

(xi) Documents do not have shaded areas, which may indicate information was covered up and the document recopied;

(xii) Correct division of manufacturing source is cited; and

(xiii) There are no disclaimers in the document (e.g., stating parts cannot be traced to the actual manufacturer or to any specific revision of the part, etc.).

(e) Unacceptability of redacted traceability documentation.

(1) When a pre-award or post-award acquisition specialist requires an offeror or contractor to submit traceability documentation, the acquisition specialist shall specifically require that the traceability documentation be unredacted. The offeror or contractor may not obscure or delete prices, dates, or any other information from traceability documents. The acquisition specialist shall reject traceability documentation that has been redacted.

(2) If any objections are raised, the acquisition specialist shall inform the offeror or contractor that failure to provide traceability documentation that is deemed acceptable by the contracting officer is a cause for rejection of its quote or offer or cancellation of its award and that redacted traceability documentation is unacceptable.

(3) The acquisition specialist may further advise the contractor that it may stamp its documentation as proprietary to protect it from release.

(4) In all cases, any traceability documentation provided by offerors or contractors shall be treated as proprietary information.

PGI SUBPART 11.4 – DELIVERY OR PERFORMANCE SCHEDULES

PGI 11.402(a)(S-90) Expedite process.

The expedite process will generally be initiated by the supply planner or customer account specialist, who would typically be the point of receipt for revised “need date” information from the customer. If the acquisition specialist becomes aware of a customer’s need for an earlier delivery, he/she can provide this information to the supply planner or customer account specialist. If the supply planner or customer account specialist asks the acquisition specialist to attempt to expedite delivery, the following procedures apply:

(1) If a purchase request (PR) has not yet been solicited, the acquisition specialist may elect to include delivery as an evaluation factor in the solicitation.

(2) If an acquisition is in the solicitation phase, the acquisition specialist may elect to issue a solicitation amendment to consider delivery in the evaluation of quotes/offers. This decision should be based on factors such as whether the estimated acquisition lead time (ALT) makes it practicable to issue a solicitation amendment (e.g., in the case of a long term contract (LTC)). For an acquisition that has been solicited and is a candidate for automated award, the acquisition specialist may elect to withdraw the acquisition from the automated system and award manually. If a solicitation amendment is done, the information will be reflected in the PR prioritization report, which assists acquisition specialists by identifying the week when a PR should be awarded in order to meet the required delivery date (RDD) consistent with attainment to plan (ATP). If the acquisition specialist elects not to issue a solicitation amendment, see PGI 11.402(a)(90)(3).

(3) If a contract has been awarded, the acquisition specialist shall contact the contractor and attempt to negotiate an earlier delivery date.

(i) If the contractor is willing to make a formal commitment to deliver on an earlier date, the acquisition specialist shall execute a contract modification, so the new contract delivery date (CDD) will be reflected in the automated systems.

(ii) If the contractor is only willing to make an informal agreement to attempt to provide an earlier delivery, the acquisition specialist shall e-mail the supply planner or customer account specialist to provide this information. The supply planner or customer account specialist can then advise the customer that there is a possibility of an improved estimated ship date (ESD). No contract modification is required under these circumstances.