MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
FOR
ADP SUPPORT SERVICES
CONTRACTS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION AND DATA SYSTEMS
DIVISION
)RMATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
WASHINGTON, D.C.
APRIL 15,1982
-------
s
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
FOR
ADP SUPPORT SERVICES
CONTRACTS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION AND DATA SYSTEMS
DIVISION
INFORMATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
WASHINGTON, D.C.
APRIL 15,1982
-------
Management Guidelines
For
ADP Support Services Contracts
Table of Contents
1. introduction 1
1.1 Background !
1.2 Purpose of Guidelines 2
1.3 Intended Audience 2
1.4 Definition of Commonly Used Terms 4
2.0 Procurement of ADP Support Services 3
2.1 Types of ADP Support Services 3
2.2 Regulations, Policies and Clearances 6
2.3 Methods of Procurement 12
2.4 Types of Contracts 14
2.5 Major Procurement Actions 17
2.6 Overview of Task Order Contracts 21
2.7 Overview of Indefinite Quantity Contracts and Delivery
Orders 22
3.0 Active MIDSD ADP Contracts 23
3.1 Feasibility Studies, Systems Evaluation and Systems
Design 23
3.2 Application Systems Development, General Programming,
Software Maintenance and Computer Systems Operation 24
3.3 MIDSD Technical Oversight and Services 25
3.4 Management Services 26
4.0 Task Order Contract Use and Administration 27
4.1 Participants 27
4.2 The Procurement Request and Statement of Work ... 28
4.3 Processing the Procurement Request 35
4.4 Contractor Response to The Request For Proposal . . 36
4.5 Contract Modifications and the Directive of Work. . 38
4.6 Subcontracting and Consultants 39
4.7 Contractor Progress and Financial Reporting .... 39
4.8 Contractor Invoicing and Voucher Certification. . . 42
4.9 Delivery and Acceptance 43
4.10 Contract Transition 43
4.11 Government-Furnished Training and Equipment .... 45
-------
5.0 Delivery Order Contract Use and Administration 47
5.1 Participants 47
5.2 The Procurement Request and The Statement of Work . 47
5.3 Processing the Procurement Request/Issuing The
Delivery Order 47
5.4 Subcontracts and Consultants 48
5.5 Contractor Progress and Financial Reports 48
5.6 Contractor Invoicing and Voucher Certification. - - 49
5.7 Delivery and Acceptance 49
5.8 Contract Transition 49
5.9 Government-Furnished Training and Equipment .... 49
6.0 Managing The ADP Systems Development Contract 50
6.1 The System Development Cycle 50
6.2 Types of ADP Projects 50
6.3 Project Management 51
7.0 Reference Documents 59
8.0 Appendix 60
8.1 Glossary of Commonly Used Terms 61
8.2 Procurement Request Rationale (i.e 12pt. document) . 65
8.3 Check List For Review of Procurement Requests ... 66
8.4 Statement of Work Check List 67
8.5 Sample Statement of Work 68
8.6 Sample Delivery Order 71
8.7 ADP Object Classes 74
8.8 Sample Technical Proposal Instructions 75
8.9 Sample Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria ... 83
8.10 Sample Technical Evaluation Work Sheet 88
8.11 Guidelines For Acceptance of Delivered Products and
Services 93
8.12 Procedures For Inspection and Acceptance of Contractor
Performance, and Certification of Contractor Invoices97
8.13 Notices of Task Completion 98
8.14 GSA Regulations For ADP Procurement 100
8.15 GSA Bulletin FPMR F-126: Abbreviated Form For Agency
Requests For ADP Equipment and Services 126
8.16 Source Evaluation and Selection Procedures 131
8.17 Table of Contents: Contracts Management Manual . . 170
8.18 A Case Study in Project Management 172
8.19 EPA Procurement Information Notice No. 81-46:
ADP Procurement Approval Procedures For New Word
Processing Equipment Until Award of Agency wide Office
Automation Contract 204
8.20 EPA Procurement Information Notice No. 80-41-1:
Procurement of Consulting Services 217
-------
ADP Contract Management Guidelines
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
EPA is very dependent on ADP contractors to provide the
technical expertise and manpower resources necessary to
support the Agency" s information processing and system
development requirements.
Recent studies of development and use of ADP systems and
resources within EPA have identified many significant
weaknesses:
' ADP contracts are predominantly cost-plus-fixed fee;
therefore, the contractor lacks incentive for effective
cost control;
1 EPA lacks sufficient expertise in managing ADP systems
development projects;
1 EPA program organizations lack sufficient expertise for
effective technical management of ADP systems
development projects;
1 Contract statements of work are frequently general,
unclear and non-descriptive of the requirements;
1 EPA's procedure for control and approval of changes to
work statements are inadequate;
' Contractor progress reports frequently lack sufficient
detailed and meaningful information;
1 Effective monitoring and control of contractor
performance is deficient;
1 EPA rarely analyzes actual vs. estimated systems
development costs;
' Project Officers lack adequate training and expertise in
contract management and ADP project management;
1 The application of ADP standards and guidelines is
inconsistent;
1 Contractor performance is rarely evaluated;
1 Cost overruns and schedule slippages frequently
characterized ADP system development projects;
-------
1 The planning, direction and control of ADP systems
development projects are frequently unstructured or
undefined;
1 The reviews of the technical content of contractor
deliverables frequently lack thoroughness.
The aforementioned problems associated with ADP systems
development through contact support can be resolved and
prevented only through the application of an assertive and
well defined ADP contracts management plan and corresponding
ADP project management principles.
1.2 Purpose of Guidelines
The purpose of this manual on ADP Contract Management
Guidelines is to present consolidated information on
standards, policies and procedures which aid effective
management of ADP systems development and support services
contracts.
The manual also provides detailed guidance to prospective
users of ADP contract support services in the areas of
statement of work preparation, project planning, project
monitoring and control, the application of standing
procurement regulations and policies, and the processing of
procurement requests.
There are many facets to the use of ADP contracts within
EPA. Consequently, this manual describes several types of
ADP contracts available, the steps associated with major ADP
procurement actions, and provides examples of relevant
statements of work, and a list of reference materials.
1.3 Intended Audience
These guidelines are intended for use by all agency
personnel who are directly involved in the formulation of
ADP support services requirements, acquisition of related
contract support services, and the technical direction,
monitoring and management of application systems development
projects or ADP facilities management and operations. Such
personnel include a wide range of managers and specialists
within EPA headquarters offices, regional offices and
research laboratories.
1.4 Definition of Commonly Used Terms
See Appendix 8.1
-------
2.0 Procurement of ADP Support Services
2.1 Types of ADP Support Services
There are a large variety of ADP support services available
through the Agency's contracts. These contracts provide
support to the full scope of the standard ADP systems
development and operation life cycle, and are utilized to
support thirteen categorical areas associated with EPA
environmental programs, organizations and activities.
The thirteen categorical areas which support EPA programs
are the following:
Monitoring Laboratory Automation
Technical Information Modeling, Simulation and
Tracking and Reporting Scientific Systems
Management Information Statistical Analysis
Graphics Bibliographic
Minicomputer application Data Base Management Systems
System Conversions
The type and extent of ADP support required for each of
these categories will vary dramatically among EPA programs
and administrative offices.
The actual services required will depend on the phase of the
ADP development and operation life cycle that is relevant at
the time the services are procured. For reference purposes,
MIDSD utilizes the following titles for significant phases
in the cycle:
(1) Initiation
(2) Feasibility Study of Alternatives
(3) System Design
(4) Program Design
(5) Implementat ion
The Initiation Phase provides the opportunity for the client
organizationTi-e. user) to meet the Agency's ADP management
and technical team for the purpose of articulating and
discussing the user's information processing needs,
organizational and programmatic objectives, and the
potential for use of ADP technology and resources. This
discussion usually includes development of suitable active
strategies and plans for further study of the requirements
which may lead to ADP system development.
The next phase of the life cycle is typically a formal
Feasibility Study, and involves detailed analysis of the
user information processing and management information
-------
requirements as they relate to the client organization's
mission objectives and functional activities. The
feasibility study will then identify and evaluate several
practical alternatives which are capable, in varying
degrees/ of satisfying the requirements. Evaluation
criteria are typically developed and used in evaluating each
altenative. The alternatives are then ranked and described
in terms of advantages, disadvantages and benefits.
The. feasibility study will usually conclude with a specific
recommendation of one of the evaluated alternatives, and
describe a logical rationale for its selection.
Based on the recommended alternative, a conceptual and
functional design may be developed to further describe the
proposed system. This conceptual design will define the
functional capabilties of the proposed system and
conceptually lay out the structure, relationships and
interfaces of potential hardware and software resources.
The conceptual design will also illustrate the flow of
information throughout the proposed system.
The System Design Phase is intended to definitize the actual
system modules to be developed, acquired and/or utilized.
These modules will be both hardware and software resources
required, data sources, generated information and data, and
the interfacing relationships with other modules and the
user.
The Program Design Phase is intended to expand the system
design specifications for each module as may be necessary to
guide the development and implementation of specific
computer programs, data files and handling procedures, and
operating procedures. In this phase, system modules may be
broken down and defined in terms of file structure, record
layouts and data linkages.
The implementation Phase consists of coding and testing of
individual system modules. Its purpose is to integrate all
of the modules into a cohesive system and to perform
system-level tests utilizing functional and general design
specifications, suitable test data and a formal test plan.
The Approval Phase consists of demonstrating, through
separate system demonstrations and/or parallel operations
with an old system, that the system operates as expected.
The Evaluation Phase is an audit performed shortly after the
system has been placed into full production use. A report
should be produced that examines how well the original
objectives, budgets, and schedules have been met.
System Documentation is necessary to provide an accurate
-------
record and description of the system design and its
functional capabilities, and the instruction for operation
and use.
Typical documents developed during the project include:
system description, detailed program design specifications,
users manual, and a program maintenance manual. In actual
practices, these documents are best developed throughout the
system development life cycle rather than at the end of the
cylce (in project).
Additional phases of the system development cycle include:
System Installation is the task of actually installing the
system on the user computer. In EPA, this phase is seldom
executed since most systems are developed and operated on
existing Agency computer systems.
System Operation and Support involves the utilization of
trained computer operators, data entry operators, data
analysts and other personnel who will control the actual
operation of the physical system, and the flow of data into
the system and the retrieval of technical and/or management
information. A system could be either a computer
application system which operates on one of the Agency's
large-scale central computer systems, or a minicomputer
system which supports a multiple of users and application
systems. In addition to operating systems, these personnel
may also be required to analyze operational problems and
execute suitable predefined recovery procedures.
System Maintenance primarily involves highly skilled
technical personnel (eg. analysts and programmers) who are
responsible for diagnosing operational and techn^cal
problems experienced during the system utilization, and the
implementation of system and program changes necessary to
respond to changing user requirements.
User Training is a vital phase of the system development
cycle and involves briefings on the system functional
capabilities to management and technical personnel within
the user organization, and the provision of the hands-on
operating instructions and exercises to staff personnel who
will directly operate the system.
As described above, the system development and operation
life cycle is complex and extensive. The technical skills
required to support each phase of the cycle will vary, and
will involve one or more of the following types of ADP
support services:
-------
(1) Technical Consulting
(2) Feasibility Studies
(3) Requirements Analysis
(4) System Evaluation
(5) System Development
(6) System Design
(7) General Programming
(8) Software Maintenance
(9) Facilities Management
(10) Computer Operations
(11) Data Entry Support
(12) Key-to-tape
(13) Keypunch ing
(14) Data Transcribing & Coding
(15) Data Reduction & Analysis
(16) Application System Operation
and Support
(17) System Audits
(18) System and Program Testing
(19) Statistical Consluting
These services are provided by systems analysts, computer
programmers, statistical and other special ADP consultants,
data analysts, computer operators, and data entry and
keypunch operators. Since several of the ADP support
services are synonomous with various phases of the system
development and operation life cycle which have already been
described, the following description will be limited to a
few selected ADP support services.
Technical Consulting covers a broad range of technical
skills depending on the specific needs for such services.
Technical consulting is usually employed during the
preliminary investigation of a potential new ADP
requirement, or for the evaluation of existing methods for
handling and processing information, or for the evaluation
of ADP support functions and organizations.
System Evaluations and Audits are occasionally required in
response to management's need for validating ADP
expenditures, or for assessment of the adequacy of program
support.
Facilities Management is a comprehensive service associated
with the operation and support of a multi-function data
processing center. This service frequently involves
mini-computer operations, computer system diagnostic
testing, operating system and utility software maintenance,
application system operation with procurement of supplies,
technical supervision and liaison with manufacturers
technical support personnel.
2.2 Regulations, Policies and Clearances
2.2.1 Introduction
Procurement of ADP supplies, services, systems and equipment
is governed by a pyramid of regulations and policies.
Regulations are specific procedural requirements and
boundaries promulgated by Federal agencies as a consequence
of Congressional legislation. Policies are established by
-------
various Agencies to further refine and implement the
procurement processes governed by Federal regulations.
Usually, policies are local to the agency which needs to
procure ADP supplies, service, etc.
Regulations and policies serve as guideposts during the
procurement process, and are prescribed for most common
types of procurement actions. They are implemented through
development of internal agency administrative procedures
which define the requirements for various levels of
management approval, known as clearances. The type of
clearances required is dependent on the level of
expenditures and the type of procurement. For example, the
procurement of ADP timesharing services in excess of $50,000
per year requires a clearance from the General Services
Administration (GSA). This clearance will be in the form of
a Delegation of Procurement Authority to the procuring
agency.
2.2.2 Regulations
Persuant to congressional legislation, the code of Federal
Regulations is a codification of the general and permanent
rules published in the Federal Register by the Executive
departments and agencies of the Federal Government. The
Code is divided into 50 titles which represent broad areas
subject to Federal regulation. Title 41 contains the
regulations pertaining to Public Contracts and Property
Management, and Consists of the following Subtitles:
0 Subtitle A - Federal Procurement Regulations
0 Subtitle B - Other Provisions Relating To Public
Contracts
0 Subtitle C - Federal Property Management Regulations
System
Subtitle A consists of Chapter 1 to 49, and is promulgated
by the Administrator of GSA. Chapter 1 contains the Federal
Procurement Regulations. Chapter 2 through 49 are
procurement regulations issued by individual Federal
agencies which implement the regulations prescribed in
Chapter 1. Subtitle B consists of chapters 50 through 100,
and provide special regulations relating to Equal Employment
Opportunity and other Department of Labor Federal Contract
Compliance Programs. Subtitle C consists of chapter 101
which prescribes the government-wide property management
regulations issued by GSA.
Chapter 101, The Federal Property Management Regulations
(FPMR) contains the specific regulations governing
procurement of all ADP supplies, services, software systems
and equipment. GSA has exclusive authority to procure all
ADP related requirements, government-wide. Thus, when EPA
requires the acquisition of ADP equipment, a large contract
-------
for ADP support services or the acquisition of a proprietary
software package, it must apply to GSA for a Delegation of
Procurement Authority (DPA). Section 2.2.4 defines the
specific clearance levels required for several types of ADP
procurement. GSA also issues various temporary regulations
not contained in the FPMR.
2.2.3 Policies
Policies which control ADP procurement actions are issued by
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), The Office of
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), EPA's Procurement and
Contracts Management Division, and Management Information
and Data Systems Division.
OMB's policies are issued through OMB Circulars which
influence and control ADP procurements throughout all
Federal agencies and departments of the Executive Branch.
For example, OMB Circular A-76 requires Federal agencies and
departments to inventory all ADP related functions and
activities, and to perform a cost/benefit analysis of
alternatives methods for supporting those activities,
including contracting and the use of government employees.
OMB Circular A-109 defines a required approach to major ADP
systems acquisitions (eg. large-scale ADP time-sharing
computer facilties).
OFPP is responsible for developing standard Federal
Procurement Regulations which will be applicable to all
civilian executive agencies and military departments. At
the present time, civilian Executive agencies use the
existing FPR while the military departments, including
Department of Transportation, utilize the Defense
Acquisition Regulations (DAR) which are based on the FPR.
OFPP has also prescribed detailed guidance for
implementation of OMB Circular A-109 for major ADP systems
acquisition.
EPA's ADP procurement actions are governed by policies and
procedures defined in the following documents:
0 The EPA contracts Mnagement Manual establishes authority
in The Procurement and Contracts Management Division
(PCMD) for implementing all Federal Procurement
Regulations and policies issued by OMB and OFPP. PCMD
publishes detailed policies and procedures for all phases
of the procurement process in the Contracts Management
Manual. See Appendix 8.17 for the Table of Contents.
0 The EPA ADP Manaual establishes authority in The
Management Information and Data Systems Division (MIDSD)
to provide ADP services and resources to EPA programs as
required, to perform necessary management and technical
oversight of all ADP activities including application
8
-------
systems development, ADP resource utilization, and ADP
systems acquisitions, and to approve/disapprove ADP
acquisitions and developments. MIDSD has issued its
guidance, policies and procedures in the EPA ADP Manual.
See Appendix 8.20 for the Table of Contents.
2.2.4 Clearances
Clearances are prescribed for the following:
procurement of contract support services
procurement of time-sharing computer resources
procurment of ADP equipment
procurement of software systems
development and operation of ADP application systems
procurement of contract support services in excess of
existing contract ceilings
0 non-competitive procurement of supplies, services,
equipment and software systems.
Table 2.1 illustrates the specific clearance requirements for
various conditions.
When EPA determines that it needs to procure support
services, ADP equipment or software, it prepares an Agency
Request for Procurement (APR) in accordance with the GSA
Temporary Regulation F-126 (see Appendix 8.15) or the GSA
Procurement Regulations (see Appendix 8.14). This APR is
used to describe EPA's requirements, the methodology for
procurement, and the duration and value of the procurement
action.
A few examples are described below.
0 EPA's ADP policy regarding the development of
application systems requires a feasibility study of
requirements and alternative approaches to
satisfy if the development cost and/or
annual operating cost exceeds $20,000.
0 Procurement of commercial time-shared computer
services in excess of $50,000 annually require a
Delegation of Procuremnt Authority from GSA.
0 Procurement of ADP equipment (eg. minicomputers) in
excess of $500,000 require a Delegation of Procurement
Authority from GSA.
0 Procurement of ADP contract support services (eg.
systems analysis, computer programming) in excess of
$300,000 (competitive) or $50,000 (sole source)
annually require a Delegation of Procurement Authority
from GSA.
-------
TABLE 2.1 CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR ADP SERVICES
SERVICES MID6D CIEARAICE GSA CLEARANZE FEASIBILITY STUDY
< $10,000
^ $10,000 to < $20, 000
^$20,000 to ^$300,000
^.$300,000 (Competitive)
^ $50,000 (Sole Source)
SOFTWARE **
< $10, 000
> $10,000 <: $100,000
^$100,000 (Competitive)
^ $50,000 (Sole Source)
HARDWARE **
< $10,000
^ $10,000 to < $20, 000
^$20,000 to < $500, 000
^ $500,000 (Ccmpetitive)
> $50 ,000 (Sole Source)
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
** Refer to Appendix 8.19 to determine Clearance requirements for ADP Equipment and software
purchases and leases.
-------
0 Contracts for ADP support services are formed with
ceilings on annual expenditures for service. Any
requirement for continued services under the contract
in excess of the ceiling is equivalent to a sole
source procurement. EPA procurement policy requires
that a Justification For Non-Competitive Procurement
(JNCP) be submitted to PCMD with the request to raise
the contract ceiling. Ceiling increases less than $1
million can be authorized by the EPA Procuring
Activity. Ceiling increases in excess of §1 million
require approval of the Director of the Procurement
and Contracts Management Division. JNCP's must be
signed by the Director of the requesting program
office and satisfy the information requirements
specified in Chapter 3 of the Contracts Management
Manual.
0 Any non-competitive procurement (i.e. sole-source)
requires that a JNCP, as described above, be submitted
with the program's procurement request.
GSA manages two major programs for the competitive
procurement of time-shared computer resources and software
systems. The procurement of time-shared computer resources
from commercial computer facilties is subject to the
Teleprocessing Services Program (TSP). TSP became the
mandatory source of supply on August 1, 1977, for Government
agencies to obtain teleprocessing (remote computing) services
from the commercial sector. The TSP provides two contracting
methods: Multiple Award Schedule Contract (MASC) and Basic
Agreement (BA).
e The TSP Schedule Contracts are indefinite quantity
contracts with fixed unit prices for teleprocessing
services. Competitive selections are made based on
selecting the lowest evaluated system life-cost
contractor that meets the mandatory technical
requirements.
0 The TSP BA contains standard terms and condition for
the fully competitive acquisition of teleprocessing
services. The BA is used when an agency's technical
requirements cannot be met by the Schedule Contracts
or the nature or size of the requirement indicate
there is a reasonalbe expectation of obtaining a lower
price from a fully competitive procurement.
Procurement of commercial software systems is subject to the
Federal Software Exchange Program. The objective of this
program is to provide for the collection and dissemination of
common-use software information through publication and
distribution of a software exchange catalogue containing
abstracts of common-use software. Federal agencies are
required to continuously review software within the agency,
11
-------
to identify software which would be useful to other agencies,
and to submit abstracts of software which meets criteria
published in FPR 101-36.1603. These abstracts are sent to
the Federal Software Exchange Center, National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151 on Standard
Form 18, the FIPS Software Summary.
2.3 Methods of Procurement
2.3.1 Formal Advertising
The two major methods of procurement used by the Government
to obtain ADP supplies, services, equipment and software
systems are formal advertising and negotiation. Formal
advertising is a very rigid method which requires that the
agency's requirements are clearly defined, complete and
accurate, and which prescribes a formal process involving six
procedural steps:
0 certification of funds,
0 preparation of an invitation for bid (IFB),
0 distribute IFB to all potential contractors who may
be interested in submitting a bid,
0 bids submitted in response to the IFB are opened and
recorded,
0 bids are evalated to determine responsiveness of the
bid and the responsibility of the bidder,
0 award the contract to the bidder who offers the
lowest, responsive bid and which is most advantageous
to the Government, price and other factors considered.
The major requirements for a satisfactory formally advertised
procurement are:
0 adequate time to carry out the necessary procedures,
0 adequate competition; that is, at least two sources
are available and can pass the test of responsibility
as prescribed in the IFB,
0 adequate specifications; that is, they must be
detailed, clear, concise and firm,
9 award must be primarily based on price.
Procurement by formal advertising is best suited when the
requirements can be specified in sufficient detail to allow a
bidder to submit a reasonable and practicable offer. Bids
are opened in public, announced, recorded and examined for
responsiveness to the requirements. Contracts with Fixed
Price terms or Fixed Price with Escalation clauses are most
common in formal advertising.
The advantages to formal advertising include increased
competition, elimination of favoritism and possible lower
prices.
12
-------
The disadvantage to formally advertised procurements include
lack of flexibility, no discussion with offerers, ineffective
procurement when specifications are inadequate or when
competition is insufficient.
If only one source is available, procurement must be executed
by negotiation; that is, discussions must be held with the
offerer to obtain the most advantageous terms for the
Government.
2.3.2 Negotiation
Procurement by formal advertising is mandatory whenever it is
feasible and practicable (FPR 1-2.102). However, EPA's ADP
requirements are rarely defined in a sufficiently clear,
detailed and firm manner to make it practicable to -use formal
advertising. Consequently, most of EPA's procurement actions
are through negotiations based on adequate competition. This
method provides maximum flexibility to evaluate competitive
offers based on past experience, qualifications, corporate
capacity, costs, and technical response to a statement of
requirements.
Negotiated procurements generally follow the following
13-step process:
e certification of funds,
0 preparation of a procurement request which defines the
requirements, and evaluation criteria.
0 a presolicitation notice shall be synopsized and
published in The Commerce Business Daily, a
publication of the U.S. Department of Commerce which
announces all Federal Goovernment procurement actions
including invitations for bid, requests for proposals
and contract awards,
formation of a list of prospective offerers,
distribution of a request for proposal to prospective
offerers which includes instructions on preparation of
a proposal, proposal evaluation criteria, statement of
requirements, certification requirements, general and
specific contract provisions, and requirements for
cost and pricing information,
8 receipt and evaluation of cost and technical
proposals,
0 determination of a competitive range of offers which
are included in the zone of future consideration.
Inclusion in the competitive range is based on
technical evaluation criteria, reasonable cost
13
-------
proposals, certifications and other factors which
establish responsibility,
0 request to offerers in The competitive range for
submission of best and final offers,
0 evaluation of best and final offers,
0 recommendation of an offer,
0 selection of an offer which is most advantageous to
the Government,
0 negotiation of final terms and conditions,
0 award of contract.
Negotiation is a process of bargaining between a buyer and
seller with the objective of reaching an agreement of the
price, terms of contract, and special conditions. This
process closely resembles commercial business practices and
frequently involves discussions between the parties to aid in
making a proposal susceptable to being acceptable. Contract
award is made on the basis of greatest advantage to the
Government which includes consideration of price and
technical factors.
2.4 Types of Contracts
Selection of a contract type is dependent on the extent and
nature of performance uncertainties, allocation of risk
between EPA and the contractor, methodology for resource
utilization, and methodology for ordering services, equipment
or supplies. This section will identify and describe the
most common contract types used in Federal procurement, and
will group them in three categories:
0 firm fixed price contracts
0 cost reimbursement contracts
0 other types of contracts
0 Basic Agreements.
2.4.1 Fixed Price Contracts
The most preferred type of contract is Firm Fixed Price
Contract. This contract places all of the risk with the
contractor, and is used only when the requirements can be
specified in detail with firm, clear and concise terms, and
can be awarded on the basis of reasonalbe price analysis.
A variation of this type of contract is the Fixed Price
Contract With Escalation or Economic Price Adjustment. This
type of contract allows for EPA and the contractor to share
certain risks based on predetermined contingency factors.
14
-------
For example, a fixed price contract could be awarded which
allowed escalation of labor rates based on a formula tied to
a specific Government inflation index (e.g. Consumer Price
Index). Use of this contract is appropriate when serious
doubt exists as to the stability of supply or labor market
conditions.
A Fixed Price Incentive Contract is a fixed price contract
which provides for possiblie adjustment of a contractor's
profit and the corresponding contract price based on a
formula which allows both EPA and the contractor to share in
reduction in costs below a negotiated target cost. This type
of contract is used when a fixed price contract is
inapropriate and where there exist positive incentives for
the contractor to control costs.
2.4.2 Cost-Reimbursement Contracts
There are many types of cost reimbursement contracts which
place most of the risks on EPA.This type of contract is
most suitable for use when performance uncertainties are
very high and when the requirements cannot be specified in
suffient detail and certainty.
A Cost Contract is a cost-reimbursement type contract in
which the contractor receives no fee.
A Cost Sharing Contract is one used for Government and
contractor jointly sponsored projects from which the
contractor may realize future benefits such as the
opportunity to market a resulting product in the commercial
market.
A Cost-Pius-Incentive-Fee Contract provides for adjustment of
the contractor's fee and the corresponding contract price
based on a formula which allows both EPA and the contractor
to share in reductions of allowable cost below a negotiated
target cost. This type of contract is suitable for systems
development projects where there exist positive incentives
for the contractor to control costs.
A Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract is frequently used on EPA
procurement support services and for application systems
development projects. In this type of contract, the
contractor assumes minimum risks and has the least incentive
to control costs since the fee is fixed at a level negotiated
when costs are originally estimated. The contractor's
obligation is to provide the best effort feasible which
includes assignment of qualified personnel and maintenance of
productive effort.
A Cost Plus Award Fee Contract provides for cost
reimbursement in addition to a fee comprised of two parts:
(1) a fixed base fee, (2) an award fee which is based on the
15
-------
quality, timeliness, ingenuity and cost effectiveness of the
contractor's performance. The award fee is unilaterally
determined by EPA program and contract personnel. This type
of contract is suitlable when EPA's primary goal is to
maximize the contractor's performance in addition to
controlling costs.
2.4.3 Other Types of Contracts
The Time and Materials Contract provides for the procurement
of supplies and services on the basis of direct labor hours
at specified fixed hourly rates (which include all costs,
overhead and fee) and material at cost. This type of
contract is used where it is not possible to estimate the
extent and duration of the work or to anticipate costs with
any reasonable degree of confidence.
The Labor Hours Contract is similar to the Time and Materials
Contract except that the contractor provides no materials.
A Letter Contract is a written preliminary contractual
document which authorizes the contractor to immediately
commence performance and is used when time is of the essence.
Indefinite Delivery Type Contracts may be used where the
exact time of delivery is not known at the time of
contracting, and include the following:
0 Definite Quantity Contracts are used where definite
quantity requirements are known in advance but orders
may placed with short lead times;
0 Requirements Contracts provides for filling all active
requirements during a specified period;
0 Indefinite Quantity Contracts provide indefinite
quantities during a specified period but establish
minimum and maximum levels.
2.4.4 Basic Agreements
A Basic Agreement is a written instrument of understanding
between The contractor and EPA which establishes contract
clauses which shall become applicable to future procurements
entered into between the parties during the term of the basic
agreement. Although the basic agreement is not a contract,
it provides a quick mechanism for executing a contract to
procure supplies, services and equipment when a substantial
number of future contracts are anticipated or when
substantial recurring negotiating problems exist with a
particular contractor.
A Basic Ordering Agreement is similar to a Basic Agreement
except that it includes specific descriptions of supplies or
services to be ordered, a description of the method for
setting prices for the supplies or services, and the
16
-------
mechanism for establishing a binding contract when the order
is placed.
2.4.5 Additional Contract Characteristics
Contracts can be drawn in one of two basic forms, Completion
or Term. The Completion form is one which describes the
scope of work to be done as a clearly defined task or job
with a definite goal or target and with a specific
end-product required.
The Term form is one which determines the scope of work to be
done in general terms and which obligates the contractor to
devote a specified level of effort for a stated period of
time.
2.5 Major Procurement Actions
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance on major
procurement actions and to distinguish them from procurement
actions under tasks order/delivery order type contracts. A
major procurement action supports a single program
requirement for ADP support services, supplies or equipment,
and requires a wide range of services from the Procurement
and Contracts Management Division (PCMD). Under task
order/delivery order contracts, the procurement process has
been simplified since all phases of the competitive
procurement process including negotiation have been
completed.
Planning a major procurement is a complex process which
extends beyond the development of technical and functional
specificiatons required to support a specific program
objective. The Project Officer should become acquainted with
each phase of the procurement process and related
organizations.
The first step in the process is to establish liaison between
the Program's Project Officer and PCMD's ADP Procurement
Section. The Project Officer would conduct a briefing of the
program requirements including technical and functional
issues, types of resources, methodology for resource
utilization and schedules. This discussion would also
include consideration of alternative types of contracts and
their impact on satisfying the program requirements.
Tentative plans for executing the procurement process can be
defined at that time, including milestones and schedules,
committment of personnel resources, and agreement to review
draft procurement request documents for comment and
feedback.
The next step in the process is the preparation of the
Procurement Request Rationale (12 point document) which
contains the following information:
17
-------
(1) Title (7) Statement of Work
(2) Estimated Period of Performance (8) Proposed Budget
(3) Project Officer (9) Reporting Requirements
(4) Background (10) Clearances
(5) Purpose of the Contract (11) Proposed Contractors
(6) Procurement Abstract (12) Evaluation Criteria
Section 4.2 provides detailed guidance for the development of
a statement of work. The proposed budget for each contract
year should contain a detailed breakdown of labor and other
resources requirements, and specify minimum, expected and
maximum levels. Labor requirements should be specified in
terms of hours per applicable labor category (e.g. program
manager, system analyst, etc.)
Project monitoring is one of the most crucial tasks to be
performed by the Project Officer since accurate information
about the project status is very diffiult to acquire. The
availability of information about achievements, progress and
problems will determine the degree of certainty about the
performance and cost status and the potential for schedule
slippages, cost overruns or inferior performance. The
Procurement Request Rationale should specify detailed
reporting requirements of the Project Officer consistant with
the complexity, magnitude and duration of the project. As a
minimum, it is recommended that following reporting
requirements be specified:
8 description of work performed and accomplishments
during the reporting period,
0 problems encountered and recommendation for
remedia1 act ion,
0 work planned during the next reporting period,
0 statement indicating comformance to techncial
requirements,
0 statement indicating conformance to schedule,
0 statement indicating conformance to budget.
The potential clearances required for a major procurement are
described in Section 2.2 and illustrated in Table 2.1. Such
clearances are typically obtained from program management,
PCMD, MIDSD and 6SA.
A direct consequence of the Procurement Request Rationale
will be publication of a Request for Proposals (RFP).
Evaluation of proposals submitted in response to the RFP will
be a critical phase of the procurement process. Therefore, a
Procurement Request Rationale must contain specific
evaluation criteria to be applied to submitted proposals.
Appendix 8.18 provides Sample Technical Proposal Evaluation
Criteria. These criteria are used to determine the offerer's
technical qualifications and capacity, and to measure the
adequacy of the offerer's understanding of the requirements
and the proposed approach and management plan.
18
-------
As a supplement to the Procurement Request Rationale, it is
recommended that the program office provides technical
proposal instructions for use by the offerer. These
instructions clarify the significance of each element of the
evaluation criteria and provide guidance for actual format
and content of the offerer's proposal.
The Procurement Request Rationale is submitted to PCMD for
use in preparing the Request for Proposal. At this point,
PCMD and the program office must discuss and resolve several
issues related to the proposed procurement action. PCMD and
the program office must agree on the adequacy and clarity of
the statement of work, the evaluation criteria and
metholology for ordering contract support services. These
issues will impact the amount of rework which may be required
on the Procurement Request Rationale document and the type of
contract which ultimately is awarded.
Finally, the RFP is issued to all firms on the Bidders
Mailing List and others who request it. Typically, the RFP
will specify a proposal due date thirty (30) days after
release of the RFP. This period of time may be used
effectively to brief the Technical Evaluation Panel on the
requirements, the RFP and Technical Evaluation Criteria. The
chairman of the Technical Evaluation Panel and the panel
members should become acquainted with procedures for
reviewing technical proposals, and for application of the
evaluation criteria.
Upon receipt of the Technical Proposals, they are distributed
to members of the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). The TEP
procedes with the technical evaluation, discusses individual
evaluations and works toward a concensus on point scores for
each evaluation criterion.
Chapter 25 of The Contracts Management Manual, published by
PCMD, provides detailed guidance and instructions for
assignment of point scores for each evaluation criterion.
However, the published scoring plan has been replaced with a
four-point plan as described below. Point scores range from
zero to four which are multiplied by weights assigned to each
evaluation criterion to calculate an ultimate value. These
values are then summarized to obtain a total score used for
comparison and ranking of the offerer's proposals. A point
score of zero is assigned to a proposal which is totally
deficient and correction of which would require a complete
revision. A point score of one signifies a proposal item
which is apparently deficient in several major respects and
requires interrogatories to obtain clarification of the
offerer's intent. A point score of two signifies a proposal
item which is adequate and meets the specifications. A point
score of three signifies that the proposal contains several
noteworthy strengths. A point score of four is assigned to a
proposal which is outstanding in most respects.
19
-------
Upon completion of the evaluation, the chairman of the TEP
prepares a summary report which provides detailed
descriptions of each offerer's strengths and weaknesses.
Special care should be taken to adequately describe the
strengths and weaknesses of each proposal; these factors
will be used later in assessing the benefits and risks which
may result from a contract award to each offerer. Summary
scores for each offerer's technical proposal are computed,
and each offeror is ranked. The TEP Summary Report
identifies which proposals are acceptable and unacceptable.
The ranked acceptable proposals comprise the competitive
range and are included in the zone of future consideration.
Offerers whose proposals are rated unacceptable are promptly
notified of their status.
Offerers whose proposals have been assigned point scores of
"one" are entitled to notification of these deficencies and
an opportunity to correct them such that the entire proposal
becomes acceptable and included in the competitive range if
possible.
In parallel with the technical evaluation process. The Cost
Advisory Board at PCMD performs the detailed cost
evaluations. The cost proposals are evaluated to determine
the degree of offerer's responsiblity, compliance with
various laws and regulations (eg. Fair Labor Standards Act),
and conformance with acceptable accounting practices. These
cost evaluations are summarized for each offerer's proposal
indicating strengths, weaknesses and potential benefits and
risks resulting from contract award.
At the option of the Contracting Officer, EPA may solicit
Best and Final offers from each firm within the competitive
range. At this point, each offeror can revise its cost and
technical proposals which would then have to be evaluated in
detail following the same procedures described above.
The summary reports from the Technical Evaluation Panel and
The Cost Advisory Board are submitted to the Chairperson of
The Source Evaluation Board (SEB) for review and final
evaluation of each offeror in the competitive range. The SEB
Chairperson prepares a final report addressed to the Source
Selection Official (i.e. usually The Head of the Procuring
Activity) which summarizes the strengths and weaknesses of
each offeror, and a determination of the potential risks to
EPA if award were made to each offeror.
Upon review of the SEB Chairperson's final report and other
supporting documents, including The Technical Evaluation
Panel Report and Cost Advisory Board Report, the Source
Selection Official selects the sucessful offeror. Thereupon,
the Contracting Officer (C.O.) is authorized to award a
contract. Usually, the C.O. will call the successful offeror
and send notice of selection; this would then be immediately
20
-------
followed up with a letter contract authorizing the contractor
to commence performance. Within 180 days, the C.O. must
complete negotiations and award the final contract.
Unsuccessful offerers are notified which offerer was selected
and awarded the contract.
2.6 Overview of Task Order Contracts
The task order contract is commonly used to produce a wide
range ADP support services to support ADP systmes studies and
limited-scale ADP system development, implementation}
maintenance and operation projects. This type of contract
provides a flexible, rapid and efficient method of responding
to ADP support requirements which can originate from any
organizational element within EPA, at unpredictable times.
This section will describe the task order contract,
limitations on its use, its capabilities and usefulness, and
an overview of the procedures for its use in EPA. Section
4.0 provides a more detailed description of procedures and
documents required for procurement actions.
Task order contracts are available through establishment of
umbrella contracts between EPA and a supplier of ADP support
services (i.e. the contractor). The umbrella contract
provides the terms and condition for general contract and
legal restrictions pertaining to cost accounting, civil
rights, environmental and fair labor practices, handling of
disputes and limitations on funding. In addition, the
umbrella contract establishes a procedure for ordering
services on the basis of individual task orders. Each task
order must specify a singular major objective (e.g. to
operate minicomputer system, or to develop the XYZ system)
and describe in as much detail as is practical the technical
and functional requirements associated with that objective.
The task order also specifies additional restrictions or
requirements such as staff qualifications, schedules and
reporting.
The major benefit to the use of the umbrella contract for
task ordering is the elimination of a costly and time
consuming competitive procurement of the required services
(e.g. typical procurement cycle ranges from six to fourteen
months). The umbrella contract itself is obtained through a
competitive procurement process and may require a one year
lead time.
The umbrella contract usually imposes several restrictions on
the services to be provided and the total volume of
procurement action which may be executed. The umbrella
contract may be structured to provide only a select group of
ADP support services as identified in Section 2.1, and may
set a definite dollar limitation on the total value of
procurement action allowed during the period of performance
plus any exercised option period(s). Typically, an umbrella
21
-------
contract is a one-year contract with two options to renew for
one year.
Each task order is executed as a formal modifications to the
contract and becomes seperate contract unto itself. Each
task order is seperately funded and controlled. The funds of
one task order shall not be used to cover cost overruns on
other task orders. As contract modifications, task orders
are referenced as Directives of Work (DOW) or Definitive Task
Orders (DTO).
2.7 Overview of Indefinite Quantity Contracts and Delivery Orders
The Indefinite Quantity Contract provides EPA with
significant advantages and flexibility when support services
requirements cannot be readily forecasted in advance.
EPA now has several contracts to provide ADP support services
through issuance of Delivery Orders of specific quantities of
hours per labor category plus other direct costs (e.g.
travel, supplies, etc). Each Delivery Order is accompanied
by a statement of work which describes the technical and
functional support requirements.
The contract specifies the particular labor categories
available under the contract and other general and special
provisions, and establishes the Delivery Order as the
mechanism for ordering the required services. These Delivery
Orders are unilateral actions taken by the Contract Ordering
Officer, and do not require the contractor to respond with a
technical and cost proposal.
The Statement of Work will usually specify the qualifications
and skills required in staffing, the methodology of
performance, a statement of objectives, a description of
technical and functional requirements and request for the
contractor's project plan. The contractor is required to
perform in accordance with the Delivery Order and its
Statement of Work. The Delivery Order will also specify the
Project Officer and the period of performance.
During the Contractor's performance in response to the
Delivery Order, the principles and procedures for project
management and monitoring used in task order contracts are
applicable.
22
-------
3.0 Active MIDSD ADP Contracts and Other Services
Because of the commonality among the types of ADP support
services used throughout EPA, and the length of time
necessary for competitive procurement of such services, MIDSD
has taken the initative to plan, obtain and manage several
task order contracts. These contracts provide a broad range
of technical support services as decribed in Section 2.1 in
two support catagories (1) feasibility studies; systems
evaluation and systems design; (2) application system
development, software maintenance, general programming and
systems operations.
At the present time MIDSD is managing contracts which support
the requirements in the two categories stated above. Section
4 and 5 provide detailed description and procedures for use
of Task Order and Delivery Order type contracts,
respectively. Tasks Order type contracts issue Directives of
Work or Definitive Task Orders and require contractor
proposals and negotiation. Delivery Order contracts issue
unilateral delivery orders which specify the hours required
per established labor catagories; no contractor proposals are
required.
3.1 Feasibility Studies, Systems Evaluation, Systems Design.
In this catagory, the contractor provides technical
assistance in response to Definitive Task Orders (DTO) in any
or all of the following areas:
0 Assisting potential users in analysis of management
information and functional ADP requirements in support
of program missions and administrative operations;
0 Performing feasibility studies and evaluation of
alternative approaches to satisfying management
information and technical requirements;
0 Performing analysis and evaluation of existing ADP
operations and systems;
0 Determining data base requirements;
8 Developing conceptual, functional and detailed designs
of ADP systems;
0 Developing functional and technical specifications for
use in solicitation documents;
0 Performing analyses and evaluation of existing methods
of information handling and impacts on organizational
work flow, productivity and decision making;
23
-------
0 Conducting surveys to determine the needs of
multi-organizational users of national ADP systems.
3.2 Applicaton Systems Development, General Programming and
Systems Operation & Software Maintenance
This category is the follow-up to the remainder of the
systems development and operation life cycle, and is divided
into three service areas due to the respective complexity of
the requirements and technical skills and experience
required for the support team. These service areas are:
(1) application systems development
(2) general programming
(3) systems operation and software maintenance.
Application system development usually follows the
completion of a feasibility study and conceptual and
functional design. The contractor is required to provide
system analysts, computer programmers and other technical
support personnel necessary to complete the development
through detailed design, implementation, installation,
testing and training. The contractor performs one or more
of the following functions for task orders issued:
* develop system and program design specifications;
9 write programs from the above developed
spec i f icat ions;
0 develop user manuals and other pertinent systems
documentat ion.
General programming primarily involves short term
singular-objective task orders. The products are small
scale and intermediate size programs. The contractor
provides the full range of service required such as:
0 development of detailed program design specifications;
0 development of program test data and test plans;
9 development of program documentation and user manuals.
Systems operations and software maintenance usually involve
the operation of minicomputer systems and remote job entry
terminals, the operation and support of application systems,
and the maintenance of computer software which may be part
of large application systems or small scale computer
functions. The contractor provides the following services
as required:
0 operate computer systems which runs on either fixed or
ad hoc schedules;
0 implement and maintain data bases;
0 operate application systems;
0 perform a variety of support functions such as data
entry, data analysis, and information retieval;
24
-------
0 code data onto prescribed coding media;
0 keypunch data from prescribed coding sheets or other
source documents;
" provide technical assistance in diagnosing operational
and technical problems with applications systems,
minicomputer systems and perpheral equipment;
0 when operating minicomputer system and application
systems, receive inputs, prepare and submit the
necessary job control statements for computer runs,
distributing results on a definite schedule, making
temporary adjustments in input and output, diagnosing
problems and initiating corrective actions as
necessary.
From time to time, MIDSD manages other types of contracts to
support unique requirements such as feasibility studies and
systems design for laboratory automation, and the
development and operation of data base management systems
applicable to unique environmental programs (i.e. the
Chemical Information System). The contractor usually
supports a narrow range of EPA organizations or
environmental programs.
3.3 MIDSD Technical Oversight and Services
The key to a successful task order is the completeness and
accuracy of a statement of work. MIDSD is staffed with a
number of computer systems analysts having experience and
skills in a wide range of technical areas and application
systems. Upon request, MIDSD will assign a system analyst
to assist the program and administrative offices in the
planning for ADP support services and preparation of an
effective statement of work. This assistance will typically
involve preliminary discussions with program personnel about
management information and information processing
requirements, and alternative approaches for satisfying
those requirements, and a strategy for utilizing contract
support services. At this stage the program office would
assign a technical representative who will assume the duties
of the DOW Project Officer when a task order is issued by
PCMD. The DOW Project Officer prepares a detailed statement
of requirements with the guidance of the MIDSD systems
analyst. The MIDSD systems analyst will assist the DOW
Project Officer develop further refinements of the statement
of work such that the ADP-related requirements are also
described to supplement the requirements stated in
programmatic fuctional terminology.
Planning of the task order will depend on the nature of the
requirements. Some of the elements which might be included
in the plan are: methodology for executing the task (e.g.
interview, literature reviews, etc.), constraints on award,
available resources, technical and progress review, staffing
skills and qualifications, management clearances, and
25
-------
milestone schedules. These elements of the plan should be
incorporated into the statement of work as formal parts of
the requirements.
MIDSD is also available to participate in technical and
progress review meetings, and in the review and critique
of draft and final documents such as study reports, design
documents and users manuals. The purpose of such reviews is
to ensure that the requirements are clearly defined and
understood by the contractor, and that the contractor's
performance and methodology are consistent with the
technical, budget and schedule requirements. Based on its
participation in the task order and the complexity or
sensitivity of relevant issues, MIDSD is able to prepare an
evaluation of contractor's performance and achievements and
recommendations for future action or decisions to the users
and program offices.
3.4 Management Services
Each ADP support services contract which is managed by MIDSD
includes provisions of "management services" which are
available for overall management and adminstration of the
contract and for use in reviewing new requirements which
originate in EPA program and administrative offices. At the
direction of the Contract Project Officer, the contractor
provides management services to assist MIDSD in the
following:
(1) analysis of common requirements between planned and
existing task orders and requirements which cut across
media, geographic and organizational lines. The principle
products of such analysis shall be the identification of
opportunities for improvements in EPA information systems
management and optimization of resources, the consideration
of existing EPA systems as feasible alternatives to the
development of new systems, the submission of special
reports and presentation of briefings on the findings and
recommendation resulting from the analysis.
(2) preliminary discussion about new requirements
originating from program and administrative offices, and
alternative strategies for providing contract support
services. These discussion will aid program personnel to
articulate technical and functional requirements in a form
compatible with ADP terminology and related factors.
(3) preparation and distribution of monthly progress
reports, presentation of monthly briefings, and contract
management.
The costs of these services are recovered through a program
support pool fee applied as a percentage of total direct
labor costs for the task order or delivery order.
26
-------
4.0 Task Order Contract Use and Administration
4.1 Participants
Representing EPA, the major participants involved in the
execution of task orders are the user, the Contracting
Officer, the DOW Project Officer, the Contract Project
Officer and the Contractor. Each participant has unique
responsibilities. The Contracting Officer (C.O.) is
designated by the EPA Administrator as the only person who
can enter into contractual agreements and obligate the
Government in the procurement of ADP support services. The
C.O. recieves all procurement requests, negotiates with the
contractor, and awards contract modifications for execution
of definitive task orders and directives of work.
The task order contract also specifies a Contract Project
Officer (C.P.O.) who provides technical assistance to
the C.O., and administrative guidance to potential users of
the contract. The C.P.O. is the technical representative of
the C.O. and acts as the C.O.'s agent in the formulation and
review of statements of work, planning for ADP support
services, and monitoring of contractor performance. The
C.P.O. advises the C.O. of technical and contractual
problems and assists in their resolution.
The DOW Project Officer is the technical representative of
the user and is responsible for the initial definition of
requirements, monitoring of contractor performance,
conducting technical and progress review meetings and for
ultimate technical evaluation of 'delivered services and
products.
Representing the Contractor, the major participants are the
Program Manager, Assistant Program Manager and Project
Control Accountant.
1. Program Manager
He/she provides technical direction and administrative
management of contract activities; develops overall program
plans, guidance and procedures necessary to adequately
provide the support required by diverse technical,
administrative and program functions and operation of EPA.
He/she reviews ADP support requirements, determines the
necessary skills and personnel resources, formulates
policies and procedures necessary to achieve effective
project planning and control, budget projections and quality
assurance. He/she meets with management, technical and
operating personnel within client organizations to review
requirements, present proposed action plans and to discuss
27
-------
and resolve technical, administrative and management
problems and issues. He/she evaluates proposed computer
systems to determine technical feasibility, costs for
development and functional adequacy.
He/she performs the above duties with extensive degree of
freedom within the constraints of the contract terms and
conditions and corporate policies.
2. Assistant Program Manager
He/she assists the Program Manager in the technical
direction of contract support activities. A major area of
specific concern is the development, implementation and
direction of a quality assurance program applied to all
phases of the contract support. The quality assurance
program provides detailed guidance related to strategies for
performing requirements analyses, feasibility studies.
systems design and evaluations, and for project planning and
selection of required support skills.
He/she assists the Program Manager in monitoring contractor
performance with respect to deliverables, project milestones
and project expenditures.
He/she would normally be assigned direct responsiblity for
technical direction of projects which support one or more of
major EPA program areas (e.g. Enforcement, Toxics and
Pesticides, etc.) In this capacity, under the general
guidance of the Program Manager, he/she performs all other
project-related duties of the Program Manager.
3. Project Control Accountant
He/she provides direct administrative support to the Program
Manager for purposes of cost accounting, labor cost
. distribution, project budget control, and record control
pertaining to work assignments and modifications issued by
the Contracting Officer. He/she receives Work Assignments
and modifications, maintains cost accounting records for
each work assignment, notifies the Program Manager and
project personnel of funding levels and expenditures,
provides detailed financial support data to the Corporate
finance officer for use in preparing monthly invoices and
management reports.
The EPA's Financial Management Division (FMD) is responsible
for receipt, processing and payment of all contract
invoices. FMD is located at the Environmental Research
Center, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The
principle contact at FMD for task order account information
is: Contract Financial Operations(MD-32).
4.2 The Procurement Request and Statement of Work
23
-------
Procurement of services under the task order contract is
initiated through the preparation and processing of a
Procurement Request Rationale (i.e. frequently called the 12
point document) and the EPA Form 1900-8, Procurement
Request/Requisition. The Procurement Request Rationale
specifies the elements of the procurement action including
statement of requirements, requesting organization, period
of performance, responsible project officer and proposed
budget. Attached to the Procurement Request Rationale is
EPA Form 1900-8 which commits specific funds for the task
and contains the necessary authorization and accounting
data.
Funding Restrictions: One-year funds can be used to procure
services in the year for which they are appropriated.
Two-year funds may be used to procure services which result
in specific products but which may be delivered in the year
following the year of appropriations, subject to contract
limitations on the period of performance.
The most important part of the Procurement Request Rationale
is the Statement of Work which defines the requirements in
as much detail as is practical and prescribes various
liaison and staffing. The remainder of this Section
provides detailed guidance for preparing a statement of
work. Section 8.4 provides a check list of items normally
contained in a statement of work.
Guidelines for Preparing Statement of Work
A statement of work is the document which identifies and
describes EPA's objectives for employing ADP support
services, and development and application of ADP systems.
These objectives relate directly 'to the accomplishment of
specific EPA missions (e.g. laboratory expermentation and
sample analysis), administrative support functions (e.g.
personnel and financial management), and various Agency
programs related to legislative enforcement regulations and
studies. The utilization of ADP resources and services is
intended primarily as means for accomplishing specific goals
of missions, programs and administrative organizations. As
such, the requirements frequently must be met under
conditions of strigent time schedules and budget contraints.
An effective statement of work will significantly aid in the
efficient, economical and effective use of ADP services and
resources, and will frequently serve as the basis and
guidelines used in subsequent project management of
developmental support activities.
A group of EPA employee's attending an ADP Project
Management course were once asked to define a statement of
work, or to describe what constituted an effective statement
of work. One attendee said that "a good statement of work
is one which leaves little to the imagination" of the
29
-------
contractor selected to provide the support services
necessary in developing an ADP system. This basically is a
good principle to be applied in preparing the statement of
work; in other words, be specific and definitive in stating
the objectives and requirements, and avoid generalities
which later can be cause for cost overruns, schedule
slippages, and misunderstandings between the contractor's
project personnel and the EPA user. There are as many types
of statements of work as there are varied projects and their
respective requirements. However, the purpose of this
section is to highlight the salient characteristics of
statements of work and to postulate several basic guidelines
to be used in preparing them.
The most significant factor which influences the nature,
structure and contents of a statement of work are the type
of project to be pursued, the types of ADP support services
required, and the kind of product (end result) expected at
the project completion. Basically, there are two major
types of projects:
1. One which is best supported through
level-of-effort performance of specific
services, and which usually applies to
objectives which can only be described in
general terms at the point of inception. In
this project, the requirements are not
specifically defined, nor can the methods and
resources required to satisfy them be
quantified. Hence, preparing a definitive
statement of work is very difficult, and EPA
must provide flexibility for structuring the
project and in executing the support functions.
A common example of a project best handled on a
level-of-effort basis is the initial
"requirements review" following inception of the
objectives. The task, therefore, is initiated
to provide consultation with the user to assist
him in defining the details of his requirements
in a form suitable for use of ADP resources, and
which details will subsequently serve as the
basis for ADP system design. In this case, the
user and the project staff have the opportunity
to consider alternative methods for achieving
the stated objectives. Frequently, this is
called a Feasibility Study (see Chapter 6, MIDSD
ADP Manual) for additional guidelines and
policies.
2. The second type of project is one which supports
definitive requirements, such as the design and
implementation of an ADP system to perform
predefined functions, and which processes
prescribed data. Mathematical models and other
30
-------
algorithms are usually clearly defined as part
of the functional specifications. Support of
this type of project can be planned in definite
terms relative to staffing requirements,
functional duties of project personnel, project
milestones and schedules, and definitive cost
projections which relate to specific
end-products. Hence, the corresponding
statement of work can also be very definitive in
terms of the requirements for project planning
and controls, contractor proposals for staffing
and executing the project, a technical
discussion of the methods and technologies to be
used, and specific cost projections and
schedules.
The following topics are suggested elements to be
included in a statement of work; descriptive narratives are
provided for each element. However, the degree to which an
element applies to the project and its statement of work
will depend on the actual requirements.
1. The statement of work must clearly state the purpose
of the project, and the objectives to be attained by
successful completion of the project. The purpose
and objectives should be directly related to
specific functions which will be supported by the
end-products or services procured.
2. It is frequently useful to provide background
information about:
0 the organization requesting support services and
products, its responsibilities and functions,
0 prior experience with methods, procedures and
resources formally used to execute functions
which will be performed or supported by results
of the project,
0 descriptions about the operating environment
which may have an impact on the project.
This type of information places the project and
related subject matter in a proper prospective, and
provides the contractor with an insight into the
significance of the project, and the qualifications
of staff personnel which may be required for user
liaison, and how the project results may be used to
resolve current problems.
3. The statement of work must include a detailed list
of the results expected from the project. These
results must be clearly and specifically identified
31
-------
and described; the more detailed information
provided will serve to minimize confusion, cost
overruns, and errors in executing the project.
Usually, these results are project deliverables; a
few examples are provided below:
0 An ADP system and programs to perform
specific functions,
0 Computer generated reports resulting from
the performance of specified functions,
0 Creation of data bases and files (e.g.
input source data, summary tables, etc.),
0 Program and systems documentation including
user operating instructions,
0 Mathematical models,
0 Statistical procedures,
0 Recommendations for experimental designs,
operating procedures, systems configuration
and design, etc,
0 Detailed report of functional requirements
and design specifications.
4. Achievement of the user objectives and expected
results will depend on the support services provided
in executing the project. In order to minimize
misunderstanding and the risk of inadequate level of
support and related qualifications, it is
recommended that the statement of work prescribe the
functional support services expected during the
execution of the project; the following are typical
functions:
0 requirement review,
0 systems analysis and design,
0 systems implementation and testing,
0 systems documentation,
0 development of operating instructions,
0 training of EPA personnel.
The statement of work should describe the minimum
qualifications and experiences required of project
staff personnel in performing the above functions.
32
-------
This will help ensure that the contractor does not
assign trainees to the project, or persons who do
not have experience in a specifc field or area of
ADP. For example, if EPA required development of a
real-time data acquisition system for a minicomputer
which supported laboratory experiments, EPA should
expect, and the contractor should assign a Systems
Analyst and/or a Senior Programmer with several
years of experience in the application of real-time
data acquisitions systems. This experience goes far
beyond FORTRAN-type applications programming.
5. A viable ADP systems design will depend on the
factors which constrain the operating environment.
The contractor is entitled to know the constraints
imposed on the end product. The EPA User who
prepares the statement of work is advised to consult
with ADP professionals about constraints, standards
and policies pertaining to the use of Agency
computer systems. The User should specify which
computer system will be employed, limits to program
size, required data storage media and limits, and
other factors which may be appropriate.
6. Other project requirements should be prescribed in
the statement of work which affect the performance
of the project support services, the quality of the
end-products and the monitoring and control of the
project.
Systems and program test plans, specificatons
and data should be requirements of the project
statement of work. These can be provided as interim
products of the project to be developed by the
contractor and demonstrated (or delivered) to EPA.
The quality and usefulness of documentation and
user operating procedures will depend on the
specific requirements related to the use of
available standards and guidelines. The MIDSD ADP
manual provides standards for documentation; other
standards are available and useful, such as Federal
Information Processing Standards Publication, FIPS
PUB 38, and FIPS PUB 64, Guidelines for
Documentation of Computer Programs and Automated
Data Systems. The statement of work should be
specific about these requirements for conformance to
a standard, and make provision for EPA review and
critique of draft copies of contractor-developed
documentation, with the requirement that EPA
comments be incorporated in a final copy of the
documentat ion.
Progress reporting and financial status
33
-------
reporting for projects are necessities for effective
control and future planning. The statement of work
must specifically require these reports (as
described in Section 4.7); however, to be useful,
they must be submitted in a timely manner
(preferably within 5 working days after the end of
the report period).
The statement of work should also require the
contractor to participate in various review meetings
which may involve technical information exchange,
review of new requirements, technical design
reviews, and progress reporting.
The statement of work must state EPA's schedule
requirements for completion of project and delivery
of various products (i.e. interim and final). These
requirements should be very specific, itemized and
dated. If the contractor believes that it cannot
satisfy the schedule, the proposal should so state,
and offer alternative recommendations.
Cost constraints are realities which should be
known at the time a project statement of work is
prepared. The EPA User (aided by ADP Professionals,
if necessary) should attempt to establish an
approximate cost for executing the project; this
will servce as a guide when reviewing the
contractor's proposal and cost projection. The
User's project cost estimate need not be included in
the statement of work.
As described above, the statement of work defines
the EPA User requirements and project conditions and
contraints. It is insufficient to establish one-way
commuications via the statement of work; the
contractor should be expected and required to
respond to the statement of work by preparing and
submitting a cost projection, staffing plan, and a
plan and schedule for executing the statement of
work.
Although Section 4.4 describes the structure and
content of an acceptable proposal, the following
will highlight specific topics which EPA should
request in a contractor's proposal in response to
the statement of work:
the contractor's understanding of the
requirements; identification of anticipated
problems, and recommended solutions,
a technical discussion and proposal for how
the contractor will execute the project and
34
-------
satisfy the requirements;
a description of how the contractor's
approach will satisfy the requirements;
the contractor's proposed staffing plan
which identifies proposed personnel, their
labor classifications, level of assignment,
qualifications, and functional project
duties;
a cost projection which is itemized to
reflect personnel labor classifications,
major system components, computer resources
required, travel, materials, subcontractors.
It would be helpful to include a detailed
cost projection profile which is comparable
to the work breakdown included in the
project plan.
The contractor should be expected to state
that all EPA stated requirements can be
satisfied by the proposed plan, staffing and
cost projection, or specify the exceptions
and recommended alternatives. EPA should
then evaluate the exceptions and recemmended
alternatives, follow-up with negotiations
with the contractor, and make final
decisions which are then reflected in the
final statement of work for the project.
4.3 Processing of the Procurement Request
The completed Procurement Request is submitted to the
Contract Project Officer at MIDSD. The Contractor Project
Officer and other appointed systems analysts will review the
Statement of Work to determine completeness, technical
accuracy and conformance with ADP procurement regulations
and EPA ADP policies. MIDSD will notify the DOW Project
Officer of any problems and will provide technical
assistance in development of an adequate statement of work.
Upon clearance by MIDSD, The Procurement Request, is then
transmitted to the Procurement and Contracts Management
Division (PCMD) where it is logged and delivered to the C.O.
The C.O. reviews the Procurement Request, and if in
compliance with the terms & conditions of the contract,
issues a Request For Proposal (RFP) to the contractor.
35
-------
4.4 The Contractor's Response to the Request for Proposal
In responding to the RFP, the contractor specifies a
technical approach to responding to the requirements,
project plan, staffing plan and cost projection with a
breakdown by labor classifications and other cost types.
The DOW Project Officer is required to review the
contractor's proposal and notify the C.O. in writing of his
acceptance.
Although Section 4.4.1 describes the structure and
content of an acceptable proposal, the following will
highlight specific topics which EPA should request in a
contractor's proposal in response to the statement of
work. The statement of work should request the
following information:
the contractor's understanding of the
requirements; identification of anticipated
problems, and recommended solutions;
a technical discussion and proposal for how the
contractor will execute the project and satisfy
the requirements;
the contractor's project plan which includes a
work breakdown, milestones, schedules, and
project controls;
a cost projection which is itemized to reflect
personnel labor classifications, major system
components, computer resources required,
travel, materials, subcontractors. It would be
helpful to include a detailed cost projection
profile which is comparable to the work
breakdown included in the project plan.
The contractor should be expected to state that
all EPA stated requirements can be satisfied by
the proposed plan, staffing and cost projection,
or specify the exceptions and recommended
alternatives. EPA should then evaluate the
exceptions and recommend alternatives, follow-up
with negotiations with the contractor, and make
final decisions which are then reflected in the
final statement of work of the project.
4.4.1 Guidelines for Task Assignment Proposals
A proposal is a document prepared by the contractor and
indicates a proposed method, plan and cost for achieving
stated EPA objectives. The following describes the
conditions for which proposals are required and the elements
of a potentially satisfactory proposal. (Caution: These
36
-------
conditions and elements are not all-inclusive) .
4.4.1.1 Frequently, the EPA user states the requirements in
general terms (e.g. a statistical report illustrating the
correlation of a subjects physiological condition to
environmental pollutants and experimental conditions). In
such cases, definitive plans and cost projections are
impossible; therefore the contractor is issued a task
assignment to perform a "requirements review" in
collaboration with the user on a level of effort basis. The
results of the "requirements review" effort should be
definitive and include a specific list of functional and
material requirements to be performed and/or designed,
implemented, tested, integrated, documented, and delivered.
Prior to executing the task, EPA and the Contractor mutually
agree on the projected cost estimate. Actual costs and
schedules are contingent on factors not known at the time of
task initiation, but the contractor commits to assignments
of specific personnel and strives to achieve the objectives
in a timely and efficient manner. During the requirements
review, the contractor is frequently meeting and consulting
with the User and other EPA personnel in an effort to
acquire additional data which affects final definition of
requirements. The final results of the requirements review
should be sufficiently detailed to permit development of
reasonably accurate designs, cost estimates and schedules
for executing the next phase which typically will be
restricted to detailed design of a computer sytem, or
formulation of the procedures and methods for performing
data analysis. At this point, the contractor will be
requested to develop this cost estimate and schedule for the
next phase.
4.4.1.2 Several EPA users and MIDSD prepare specific
detailed statements of requirements; otherwise, statements
of requirements are the products of a requirements review
task described in paragraph 4.4.1.1 above. It is advisable
that the next phase for satisfying these requirements be a
systems design task. In such cases, the contractor is
requested to develop a plan, cost projection, and schedule,
and propose qualified personnel to staff the task. For a
system design task, the following types of data should be
included in the contractor's proposal:
a brief summary of the requirements (not a repeat of
the original statement of requirements); references
to specific EPA correspondence.
a technical discussion which describes the
contractor's understanding of the requirements;
identification of signficant technical issues,
complexities, and anticipated problems;
recommendations for resolving problems; proposed
methods, procedures and techniques for satisfying
37
-------
the requirements; tentative conceputal design.
a detailed plan for executing the systems design
effort including identificaton of a specific
subsystem and program module wherever possible; a
list and schedule of milestones;
a staffing plan which identifies all proposed
personnel, the level of assignment, labor
classification, and functional duties;
a cost projection for each major subsystem,
including preparation of design documentation.
The product of this phase is a detailed design document
(see Appendix 3.11 for detailed guidelines).
4.4.1.3 A third type of proposal relates to implementation
of a specific ADP system for which detailed design
specifications are available. The contractor is expected to
provide the following data in a proposal:
a technical discussion which illustrates the
contractor's understanding of the required ADP
system, and identification of anticipated problems
and recommended solutions;
a detailed plan for implementing the system
including a work breakdown of subsystems and
programs, and work to be performed for each (e.g.
design, implementation, etc.); a schedule of
milestones;
a technical discussion which describes how the
contractor plans to integrate and test subsystems,
and verify that all functional specifications are
satisfied.
a staffing plan which identifies all proposed
personnel, the level of assignments, labor
classification, and functional duties.
a cost projection for each major subsystems,
including systems and program documentation, and
user operating instructions.
4.5 Contract Modifications
If the contractor proposal is acceptable to the DOW Project
Officer, the C.O. awards a contract modification in the form
of a Directive of Work, (or Definitive Task Order) ,
authorizing the contractor to incur necessary costs incident
to providing the services required.
33
-------
In addition to Directive of Work, the contract may be
modified to achieve the following other purposes:
change of DOW Project Officer; a memorandum from the
client's Divison Director to the C.O. is sufficient
to authorize this change;
the DOW Project Officer, in a memorandum to the
C.O., may request that the DOW be modified to change
the period of performance;
The DOW Project Officer, in a memorandum to the
C.O., may request that the DOW be modified to
incorporate changes to the requirements;
an EPA Form 1900-8, may be submitted to the C.O.
authorizing the incremental allocation of funds to
the DOW due to changing requirements or the need for
continuing services; or the deobligation of funds
due to reduced requirements or the need for
termination of the D.O.W.
4.6 Subcontracting and Consultants
Subcontracting and use of special consultants require
approval of the C.O. The contractor must demonstrate that
selection of a subcontractor is based on competition to a
maximum practicable extent in view of the existing
circumstances. Otherwise, the C.O. may require the
equivalent of a Justification For Non-Competitive
Procurement as described in Chapter 3 of the Contracts
Management Manual.
The use of special consultants presents a few unique
requirements. The Contractor must indicate to the C.O. the
basis of selecting a consultant, including statements
concerning unique and specialized qualifications and
experience, the rates to be paid to the consultant and that
those rates are compatible with other equally qualified
consultants.
EPA Procurement Information Notice No. 80-41-1 specifies the
policies and guidance pertaining to procurement of
consulting services (see Appendix 8.20).
4.7 Contractor Progress and Financial Reports
During the execution of the task, the contractor delivers
periodic status reports and monthly progress reports to EPA.
These reports and monthly financial reports illustrate the
quality of contractor's performance with respect to
conformance to schedule and budget, and support of technical
requirements.
39
-------
4.7.1 Guidelines for Task Progress Reports
4.7.1.1 Progress reports should not include a repeat of the
statement of work. A progress report describes the work
performed, accomplishments and problems encountered; it is
the primary instrument used to convey how well a project
satisfies the technical, functional, and schedule
requirements, and is the basis for the EPA Project Officer
and User to determine the compatibility between the costs
incurred and the result attained.
4.7.1.2 Description of Work
Each task employs a specific staff of personnel at
various prescribed labor classificatons; each person has
specific duties to perform (e.g. systems analysis, program
design, coding, testing, documentation, etc).
The progress report should describe the functional work
performed by each person during the reporting period - these
descriptions should be directly related to the task
requirements and system components (e.g. subsystems, program
modules, etc.) .
4.7.1.3 Statement of Accomplishments
Concise, factual, descriptive statements of actual
achievements during the reporting period relative to each of
the following topics:
specific task requirements (e.g. program design,
program modules, development of models and
specifications, functional specifications).
task milestones and schedules (e.g. level of
attainment, deliveries made, demonstrations,
examples of work results and computer output, etc).
The progress report should describe how well the
requirements are being satisfied.
4.7.1.4 Problems Encountered
A description of the problems encountered, and
recommendations for solution. A statement of what the
contractor has done or will do to resolve the problem. A
statement concerning th problems* impact on the task
schedule and costs.
4.7.1.5 Conformance to Schedule
Concise statements on the contractor's ability to
satisfy the task schedules including those related to the
task milestones, and a comparison of actual accomplishments
40
-------
versus those scheduled.
4.7.1.6 Conformance to Cost Projections
Level of effort tasks usually require varying levels of
technical support of requirements which are not clearly and
specifically defined. As such, the effort reported and
costs expended are not compared with specific targets.
However, cognizant EPA personnel (i.e. Project Officer, and
User) are required to make a judgement that the effort and
costs expended are consistent with the accomplishments
during the progress reporting period.
Tasks for which specific cost projections have been made
accordingly require more stringent management controls and
cost and performance monitoring procedures. Ideally, a cost
projection should be based on sound methods for work
breakdown, system modularization, staff planning of work
functions and allocations, and overall task planning to
include milestone scheduling, program testing, and system
integration and testing (to name a few). In other words, a
desciplined methodical approach to project planning and cost
estimating. The progress report should state the
conformance to the original cost projection and an estimated
cost to complete the task.
If the cost-to-complete estimate exceeds the balance of
funds remaining, a reason and justification must be stated
in the progress report. Decisions to allocate additional
funds will be based on the stated reasons and
j usti fications.
A change of scope in the user's requirements does not
constitute a valid justification for a projected cost
overrun. Instead, the change of scope must be reflected in
a revised statement of work; additional funds required shall
be allocated in accordance with normal procedures applied to
cost estimating, User and Project Officer approval, and
formal issuance of task modification.
4.7.1.7 Work to be Performed in the Next Report Period
A description of work to be performed and projected
achievements during the next report period. Normally, this
description should conform to the project plan and
milestones established for the task.
4.7.2 Financial Reports
Each DOW is established with a base level of authorized
funds. The contractor is prohibited from incurring excess
costs without formal contract modifications. Typical cost
accounting and labor cost distribution systems used by
commercial firms impose significant delays in compiling and
41
-------
reporting contract expenditures. In addition, current
practices for sumitting expense vouchers preclude the
availability of detailed supporting data such as a breakdown
of direct labor costs by labor classification.
The consequence of these conditions is a lack of visibilty
The rate of contractor expenditures. This lack of visibilty
presents difficulties for the DOW Project Officer to ensure
that authorized funds are not exceeded prior to satisfying
the requirements.
The Contractor should be required to provide timely
financial status reports which indicates the following
information:
reporting period
authorized funding
commulative expenditures
balance of funds
total expenditures during reporting period
identification of personnel who expended effort
during the reporting period
effort expended by each assigned person during the
reporting period
identification of other direct cost items (e.g.
travel, materials, equipment rental, training,
subcontracting, etc.)
4.8 Contractor Invoicing and Voucher Certification
The contractor is required to submit a monthly voucher for
each task order which specifies the costs incurred for
direct labor, subcontractors, materials, travel and other
direct costs. Several additional overhead costs plus fee
are applied to the direct costs to determine the total cost
for the invoicing period.
At this time, the direct labor costs cited in the voucher
are not always broken down by labor category, nor are the
other direct costs specifically identified. MIDSD has
arranged to obtain additional detailed information which
supports the summary costs listed in the contractor's
voucher. This detailed information is provided to the DOW
Project Officer as an aid to tracking of expenditures.
Contractor vouchers are submitted to the Financial
Management Division (FMD) at EPAvs Environmental Research
Center located at Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
FMD*s policy is to send a Certification Notice to the DOW
Project Officer who signs the certification notice
indicating that either (1) goods and services have been
delivered or (2) sufficient progress has been made to
warrant payment of the charges.
42
-------
The Certification Notice is returned to FMD. If the DOW
Project Officer experiences problems with the contractors
performance or deliverable, and beleives that payment of the
voucher should be suspended pending resolution of the
problem or disallowed, he should notify the C.O. and request
that FMD take specific remedial action.
Subsequent contractor vouchers are automatically paid by FMD
without DOW Project Officer certification. This procedure
is intended to exedite prompt payment to the contractor.
At the time payment is made, FMD sends a notice of that
payment attached to the voucher to the DOW Project Officer.
If the DOW Project Officer has experienced a problem, he
should notify the C.O. as described above.
4.9 Delivery and Acceptance
Throughout the execution of a task order, the contractor may
be required to deliver interim reports on studies, surveys,
system designs, and systems evaluation. Such reports should
be initially delivered in draft form only for review and
critized by the DOW Project Officer and other concerned
personnel. It is recommended that technical discussion be
held to ensure the contractor is performing in accordance
with the requirements, and written comments be presented to
the contractor for incorporation into deliverable documents
in preparation of final versions.
Section 8.11 of the Appendix provides detailed criteria for
evaluating various types of deliverable documents such as
feasibility studies, requirements analysis, and conceptual
system design.
Upon completion of a task order, the DOW Project Officer
should send a notice of task completion to the C.O.
indicating that all services have been satisfactorily
performed and that all deliverables have been make. A
sample letter is available in Section 8.13 of the Appendix.
4.10 Contract Transition
Whenever ADP support services contracts are recompeted, DOW
Project Officers must prepare for the possible transiton
from one contractor to another. The amount of planning will
depend on the nature of current and future ADP support
services requirements.
EPA DOW project officers must prepare for a contract
transition period commensurate with the nature of current
and future contract support requirements. That is, if the
current project is an on-going facilities management and
operations support activity, project officers must develop
plans for terminating the support received from the
43
-------
incumbent contractor and for phasing-in the successor
contractor. The guidelines presented in this document will
identify and describe several actions which project officers
must take to ensure a successful transition between
contractors.
These requirements also apply to incomplete general
programming and systems development projects which the
project officer must transfer from the incumbent contractor
to the successor contractor.
(1) Long before the projected completion date of a
develoment project or the start date of the phase-in
period, the user must determine his/her exact needs
for system and program documentation, user manuals and
operating instructions. The user must then require
the incumbent contractor to prepare detailed, complete
and comprehensive documentation.
(2) The user must conduct several technical reviews and
project management review meetings with the incumbent
contractor to obtain an accurate status report
describing accomplishments to date, project status,
unfinished or incomplete work or requirements. Users
must obtain this status information for each system
module, operating procedure, and support function.
(3) Using the status information obtained above, the user
must develop a detailed statement of requirements
necessary to complete the projects. The incumbent
contractor can contribute to this task. Facilities
management operation support tasks will require
development of complete operating instructions and
other support procedures*
(4) Project officers must develop a detailed staffing plan
to show what resources are needed to support future
requirements (i.e. to complete the project). This
staffing plan should include all required labor
classifications, quantity of persons per labor
classification, skill and qualification requirements,
functional responsibilities for each person, and
project assignments and duties.
(5) Project officers must develop system test plans and
procedures, including suitable test data, to provide
effective benchmarks for evaluating software products
developed and delivered by the incumbent contractor.
The test plans should specify the expected results
(e.g. sample report layouts) and acceptance criteria
and can be the basis for transferring responsibilities
to the successor contractor. Project officers must
initiate corrective action if required and repeat the
test plan and procedures.
44
-------
(6) Frequent technical and progress briefing sessions for
both contractors (together) are essential to effective
transfer of knowledge between contractors. Suggested
topics for these briefings include: requirements
review, accomplishments and available staff, future
action plans necessary for project completion and/or
transfer to successor contractor, and an assesment of
the transfer process.
(7) Project officers must develop future action plans to
identify specific tasks to be performed and related
personnel assignments among incumbent and successor
contractor personnel. For each task, project officers
must identify specific contingency factors which may
significantly affect performance. These factors may
include review of deliverable products, technical
briefings and design walk-throughs , accomplishments,
computer resources and turn-around time, etc.
In summary, a successful phase-in of a new contractor is
dependent on an accurate assessment of work completed and
incomplete, available documentation and other information;
retention of key incumbent personnel; and detailed work
plans which delineate responsibilities between the user and
contractor personnel. Although it is evident that the
successor contractor will be eager to perform diligently the
services required, we hope that professional pride among the
incumbent personnel will ensure maximum effectiveness in the
transfer of responsibilities and necessary technical
information.
The individual DOW Project Officer will be the focal point
for planning and supervising the contractor phase-in.
However, do not hesitate to call the Contract Project
Officer if you need support which may require the
involvement of overall contract management. Also, keep the
Contract Project Officer informed about progress in making
the necessary transitions.
4.11 Government-Furnished Training and Equipment
In the performance of his responsiblities the contractor is
obligated to provide qualified, fully trained and
experienced personnel, for assignment to task orders awarded
by the C.O. Such qualification, training and experience
must be related to ADP industry-common technologies, methods
and hardware and software resources. The following is a
non-exhaustive sample of areas in which such personnel must
have the requisite background or that the contractor will
provide training at its own expense:
. FORTRAN, COBOL, PL1 programming languages
. IBM 360, 370 and 3032 Computer system
. UNIVAC 1100 Computer system
45
-------
. PDP-11/70 mini computer system
. System 2000, IDMS and DMS-1100 data base management
systems
. Computer concepts
EPA will not pay for nor provide training in such industry
common subjects. The contractor is expected to employ
personnel with a broad range of skill and experience.
EPA will, however, provide training to contractor personnel
in subjects which are required by active task orders and
which are unique or infrequently utilized in the industry.
Examples of such subjects would be INFORM -11, MARK IV data
management systems, and Inquiry and Reporting System (IRS).
Requirements to train contractor personnel at EPA expense
shall be reviewed and approved by the DOW Project Officer.
Equipment and Software
Federal Procurement Regulations and EPA policies place
strigent restrictions on the procurement and lease of ADP
equipment and computer hardware systems. Accordingly, the
ADP support service contract shall not be a mechanism used
to circumvent the regulations and policies.
Occasionally, there may be a requirement for the contractor
to lease low-speed or remote-job-entry terminals for use in
remote off-site contractor-provided facilities. The leasing
of such equipment must be required to support either a
specific task order, or a pool of ADP support personnel
assigned to multiple of task orders.
Such leases require the expressed approval of the DOW
Project Officer and the Contract Project Officer. The
leasing costs will be invoiced as other direct costs and
either applied to a specific task order, or incorporated
into an EPA approved support pool overhead.
The occurrance of equipment purchases shall be very rare,
and shall require the expressed approval of the C.O. and
MIDSD. Recovery of such expenditures if approved will be
arranged on a case-by-case basis.
46
-------
5.0 Delivery Order Contract Use and Administrtion
5.1 Participants
Section 4.0 provided a detailed description of the scope of
task order contracts and the procedures for their use.
The use of delivery orders for acquiring support services
provides a simplified and efficient mechanism, and avoids
the formality of contract modifications when ordering
support services.
The participants in this process include the Contracting
Officer, the Contract Ordering Officer, the Delivery Order
Project Officer and the Contractor's Program Manager,
Assistant Program Manager and The Project Control
Accountant. The Contract Ordering Officer may also be the
Contract Project Officer. The duties of these participants
are descibed in Section 4.1. The Contract Ordering Officer
has the authority to issue delivery orders under the
Contract, and receives contractor invoices and supporting
documents for certification.
EPA%s Financial Management Division at RTP is responsible
for payment of certified invoices.
5.2 The Procurement Request and The Statement of Work
Section 4.2 provides a detailed description of the
requirements for preparing the Procurement Request and the
statement of work. This procedure is applicable to the
delivery order.
5.3 Processing the Procurement Request/Issuing the Delivery
Order
The completed Procurement Request is submitted to the
Contract Ordering Officer at MIDSD. The Contract Ordering
Officer and other appointed systems analysts will review the
Statement of Work to determine completeness, technical
accuracy and comformance with the contract, ADP procurement
regulations and EPA ADP policies. MIDSD will notify the
Delivery Order Project Officer of any problems and will
provide technical assistance in the development of an
adequate statement of work.
Upon clearance by MIDSD, the delivery order is then prepared
and signed by the Contract Ordering Officer whereupon it is
transmitted to the Procurement and Contracts Management
Division for obligation of the cited funds and distribution
of copies to the Contractor, FMD, the C.O., The D.O. Project
Officer, and The Contract Ordering Officer.
The delivery order is a unilateral action by EPA; therefore,
47
-------
the contractor does not respond with a technical and cost
proposal. Upon receipt of the delivery order, the
contractor is obligated to commence performance in
accordance with the delivery order and the attached
statement of work. However, the delivery order and
statement of work does require the contractor to provide a
project plan and staffing plan which demonstrate
understanding of the requirement and an acceptable action
plan and the assignment of staff with adequate
qualifications and skills.
The delivery order will contain the following information as
a minimum:
1. hours per labor category, rates and cost for direct
technical support,
2. hours per labor category, rates and cost for program
support comprised of program manager, assistant program
manager, project control accountant. The cost for
program support is based on a predetermined fixed
percentage of total technical support labor cost;
3. prorated cost of program support travel,
4. other direct costs (non-labor) such as travel, supplies,
training, equipment,
5. the period of performance,
6. name of the designated delivery order Project Officer.
5.4 Subcontracts and consultants. Subcontractor costs may be
constrained by the contract labor classifications and
established rates. However, their use requires approval of
the Contracting Officer and a formal modification to the
contract. The contractor must demonstrate the selection of
a subcontractor is based on competition to a maximum
practicable extent in view of the existing circumstances.
Otherwise the C.O. may require the equivalent of a
Justification For Non-competitive Procurement as described
in Chapter 3 of the Contracts Management Manual.
The use of special consultants presents a few unique
requirements. The contractor must indicate to the C.O. the
basis of selecting a consultant, including statements
concerning unique and specilized qualifications experience,
the rates to be paid to the consultant and that those rates
are compatable with other equally qualified consultants.
EPA Procurement Information Notice No. 80-41-1 specifies the
policies and guidance pertaining to procurement of
consulting services. (see Appendix 8.20).
5.5 Contractor Progress and Financial Reports
The reporting requirements under delivery orders are the
same as for task orders, as described in Section 4.7.
48
-------
5.6 Contractor Invoicing and Voucher Certification
The contractor is required to submit a monthly voucher for
each delivery order to the Contract Ordering Officer at
MI DSD. This voucher will specify the hours expended for
each contract labor category and corresponding costs based
on established rates, other direct costs such as travel,
supplies, equipment, and costs for subcontractors and
consultants. The costs for subcontractors shall be reported
at established labor categories and rates.
The Contractor shall also send a copy of the voucher to the
Delivery Order Project Officer who will notify the Ordering
Officer in writing either acceptance of the invoiced costs
or a description of a problem to be resolved. The Ordering
Officer will either certify the voucher or request FMD to
suspend payment of specific charges pending resolution of
the problems.
5.7 Delivery and Acceptance
The delivery and Acceptance Provcedures described in Section
Procedures described in Section 4.9 are applicable to
delivery orders.
5.8 Contract Transition
In the event the support service contract is recompeted,' the
procedures described in Section 4.10 are applicable to
delivery orders.
5.9 Government-Furnished Training and Equipment
The restrictions on Government-Furnished Training and
Equipment described is Section 4.11 are applicable to
delivery orders.
49
-------
6.0 Managing The ADP System Development Contract
6.1 The System Development Cycle
The traditional system development cycle consists of the
following phases:
Requirements Analysis
Feasibility study of alternative methods to satisfy the
requirements
General and detailed design
Implementation and documentation
Installation and testing.
Section 2.1 has provided detailed description of each of
these phases.
The contracts available through MIDSD provide the resources
necessary to support any and all of the development phases.
However, it is the reponsibility of the EPA User of contract
support services to be aware of the responsibilities shared
by the contractor and the User. These responsibilities are
manifested through communications between the Parties about
requirements, project status, accomplishments and potential
problems, and through systems documentation.
Three major problems with systems development contracts are:
incomplete communications, a lack of detailed planning of
the work to be performed, and the lack of adequate skills
and resources necessary to perform the work. During the
requirements analysis phase, the User must clearly define
the project objectives, identify the information resources
available, identify the participating organizations and
personnel and guide the contractor's efforts in terms of the
established objectives.
The contractor is expected to effectively apply its
resources, skill, experience and expertise to ensure quality
performance and results, and to develop a sucessful strategy
for executing the analysis.
The effectiveness of contract support will depend on the
type of project to be supported, the quality and
completeness of requirements definitions, and the integrity
of project management methods applied. This section will
discuss each of these factors and will identify several
potential problems, related causes and suggested remedies.
6.2 Types of ADP Projects
The most significant factors which influence the nature
and structure of contract support are the type project to be
pursued, the types of ADP support services required, and the
kind of product (end result) expected at the project
50
-------
completion.
projects:
Basically, there are two major types of
1. One which is best supported through level-of-
effort performance of specific services, and which
usually applies to objectives which can only be
described in general terms at the point of
inception. In this type of project, the
requirements can not be specifically defined, nor
can the methods and resources required to satisfy
them be quantified. Hence, preparing a definitive
statement of work is very difficult, and EPA must
provide flexibility for structuring the project
and in executing the support functions. A common
example of a project best handled on a
level-of-effort basis is the initial "requirements
review" following inception of the objectives.
The project, therefore, is initiated to provide
consultation with the user to assist him in
defining the details of his requirements in a form
suitable for use of ADP resources, and which
details will subsequently serve as the basis for
ADP systems design. In this case, the user and
the project staff have the opportunity to consider
alternative methods for achieving the stated
objectives. Frequently, this is called a
Feasibility Study (see Chapter 6, MIDSD ADP
Manual) for additional guidelines and policies.
2. The second type of project is one which supports
definitive requirements, such as the design and
implementation of an ADP system to perform
predefined functions, and which processes
prescribed data. Mathematical models and other
algorithms are usually clearly defined as part of
the functional specifications. Support of this
type of project can be planned in definite terms
relative to staffing requirements, functional
duties of project personnel, project milestones
and schedules, and definitive cost projections
which relate to specific end-products. Hence the
corresponding statement of work can also be very
definitive in terms of the requirements for
project planning and controls, contractor
proposals for staffing, a technical discussion of
the methods and technologies to be used, and
specific cost projections and schedules.
6.3 Project Management
6.3.1 Introduction
Project management is the most critical factor which
affects the quality and effectiveness of contract support,
51
-------
and is a shared responsibility between the contractor and
the User. Both the contractor and the User must
participate is each phase of the project management
process: planning, monitoring and control. The required
level of User participation in the project management
process will depend on which party assumes the risks for
contract support and the expected results, the amount of
risk and potential for risk sharing.
In the development of application systems, the preferred
type of contract is fixed-price, whereby the contractor
assumes all of the risk. In this case, the User is not
directly involved in the management process during the
execution of the contract, but the contractor must
exercise stringent project management. However, in the
EPA environment, most requirements cannot be definitized
in sufficient detail to warrant the use of fixed-price
contracts. As a consequence, the cost reimbursement type
contract is utilized, whereby EPA assumes all of the risks
related to costs, quality and timeliness of delivery.
When a contractor responds to an EPA User's statement of
requirements with cost, technical and staffing proposals,
he is only providing an estimate of the resources
necessary to satisfy the requirements, not a commitment to
limit the costs to the proposed amount. The Contractor's
responsibility is to provide the required skills and
resources and to make the best effort to complete the work
as proposed.
The tendency among many users of contract services is to
provide very general statements of work, or remain aloof
from the procedings, or perform very superfical reviews of
contractor performance, methodology and achievements. The
user takes for granted that the communications about
requirements have been effective and clearly understood.
Frequently, there are no acceptance criteria on quality
assurance factors applied to the final deliverables.
Unfortunately, the end product may be delivered and
determined to be unsatisfactory with the funds fully
expended.
When this happens, What recourse does the User have?
In reality, the user has very little recourse, since the
contract was cost reimbursement. In many cases, the
contract does not contain a quality assurance/warranty
clause - an easy oversight. The User's investment at
point of delivery is very high - the apparent cost to
complete the project relatively low in comparison.
Usually, the user will not choose to write-off his
investment - he will pay the extra price to complete
the project.
Here is where the major problem lies. The contractor's
52
-------
estimates to complete the project are no more reliable
than his original estimates. The same types of
uncertainties probably exist in the last phase as in the
previous phase.
The solution will be realized through application of
discipline in planning, monitoring and control. At this
stage, the most crucial requirement is the evaluation and
assessment of work remaining to complete the project. An
accurate assessment must be made of the accomplishments
with relationship to requirements, and then to formulate
realistic detailed action plans necessary to complete the
work .
The major elements of effective project management are
discipline, visibility, communications. EPA users must
participate directly in each phase of a project (i .e
planning, monitoring and control). Active involvement of
the user will contribute to more effective communications
about requirements and greater visibility of contractor
performance and accomplishments.
6.3.2 Project Planning
A project plan and cost projection is only as good as
the methods and information used in defining the elements
of a system to be designed and implemented, the work
functions to be performed by project staff personnel for
each system element, and the care taken in estmating the
time-dependent factors involved. The following narratives
highlight the factors which may be included during the
planning phase:
Given a system design specification document, or
statement of functional requirements, develop a detailed
breakdown of the work functions to be performed by each
person; this work breakdown should be directly related to
each system element contained in the design specification
document, or each item listed in the statement of
functional requirements. Figure 6.1 illustrates the work
breakdown and estimated level of effort for each staff
member.
Each work function and associated system component can
be related to specific milestones which signifies
completion of an activity and results in a tangible
product (e.g. system design specification document, system
test plan etc.) Specific milestones should be identified
for future reference in project monitoring.
The projected level of effort for each item in the
work breakdown should be estimated for each time period,
taking into consideration total effort required for each
item and the possible division of labor for each person
53
-------
Figure 6.1 Work Breakdown Structure/Projected Staffing Plan
Person-Hours Per Time Period
01
Subsystem A
Systems Analysis (Specifications Doc)
SA
SP
Program Design (Flow Charts)
SP
P
Program Implementation (Coding)
SP
P
Program Testing
SP
P
Program Documentation
SP
P
Repeat for each subsystem
System Testing
Devel. of System Test Plan & Spec.
SA
SP
Devel. of System Test Data
SP
System Integration & Testing
SA
SP
P
System Documentation
SA
SP
P
40
40
40
40
20
20
40
40
20
40
20 30
10
20
30
10
10
40 40 40
20
30
10
10
40
10 10
Milestone
20
30
10
10
20
10
10
10
20
30
30
20
40
40
20
40
40
20 20 20 20
40
40
-------
Table 6.1 Milestones
1. Delivery of System Design Specifications
2. Delivery of Program Flow Diagram
3. Completion of Program Coding and Sytax Debugging
4. Satisfactory Execution of Initial Program Stand Alone Tests
5. Draft Copy of Preliminary Program Documentation
ui
tn
6. Delivery of Program Documentation
7. Delivery of a System Test Plan and Test Specifications
8. Completion of System Test Data
9. Completion of Satisfactory Execution of System Integration and Testing
10. Draft Copy of System Documentation
11. Delivery of Completed System Documentation
-------
assigned to the project.
The level of effort required for each item will depend
on the skills, qualifications and experience of the
personnel assigned; it is strongly advised that the person
who is responsible for a work function and system
component directly participate in the development of
projected efforts.
In projecting efforts, the following factors should be
considered:
time allowance for design and progress review
meetings ,
time allowance for meetings with the user for
purposes of technical information exchange,
time allowances for independent reviews of project
documents by the User; however, project personnel
should attend to other project tasks in the
interim,
time allowance for preparing progress reports,
travel time,
realistic number of computer passes required per
program module for compilations, test runs, etc.,
a contingency factor to allow for computer system
failures.
Cost projections for the task is simply the summation
of the hours per labor classification and applying the
contract labor rates.
6.3.3 Project Monitoring and Control
Although the tasks of preparing the detailed data for
planning, reporting, system design and proposals can be
very tedious and time consuming, project monitoring can
also be very time consuming and exasperating. Three major
issues directly impact the effectiveness of project
monitoring from an EPA perspective:
1. timeless of progress and financial reporting,
2. the degree to which the contractor's performance
conforms to the approved project plan and statement
of work,
3. changes in user requirements which may not be
reflected in the most current statement of work.
56
-------
The EPA User and Project Officer should be particularly
concerned about the rates of progress and expenditures,
the compliance with stated requirements, and the methods
used by the contractor in executing the project. To
effectively monitor the project, they need accurate,
detailed information in a timely manner - monthly progress
reports should be delivered within five working days after
the end of the reporting period. Delays in obtaining and
reviewing progress reports add to the confusion and
ambiguity about actual status of the project. In fact,
there are occurances of a contractor either having a
significant problem or performing a function erroneously
during the time between the end of the report period and
the delivery of the corresponding progress report. In
many cases, these factors are justifiable reasons for
modification to the statement of work and for allocation
of additional funds; in others, they are not justifiable
reasons. The issue here is the time required of the User,
Project Officer and Contractor to resolve such problems
equitably. Hence, timely reporting with attendant
visibility through accurate detailed informaton provides
effective monitoring and control, and minimizes the
occurance and impact of problem areas (including
misunderstandings) .
The degree to which the contractors performance
conforms to the project plan and statement of work
determines the reliability of cost projections and
schedules. Certainly, personnel at every management level
have had the unpleasant experiences of justifying the need
for additional personnel and financial resources and
extensions in delivery schedules.
Improper planning frequently cause difficulties in
achieving cost scheduling objectives. Also, unanticipated
technical and operational problems, and uncontrollable
circumstances can frequently create havoc with project
achievements. In many cases, management can deal with
these issues and problems effectively. However, if the
contractor does not perform the required functions
according to the established plan and in conformance with
the requirements of the statement work, the project is out
of control. The only effective methods for handling this
situation are: first, recognize it, get all the facts on
project status and expenditures, then develop a completely
new plan - then, execute measures which ensure that the
plan is followed.
Although the User has the prerogative to alter his/her
requirements, care should be exercised to ensure that the
new requirements are reflected in a revised statement of
work, and a revised project plan, staffing and cost
projection. If these conditions are not satisfied, and if
the contractor responds and satisfies the new
57
-------
requirements, the project is out of control. Again, the
original projections of costs and schedules are
meaningless. It is therefore advisable to spend the time
reviewing the new requirements with respect to the current
project status and alternate methods for achieving them.
In addition to the above methods for project
monitoring and control, it is advisable to review projects
in as much detail as possible, particularly referring to
interim milestones. If the project plan was sufficiently
detailed and included a work breakdown and scheduled
milestones, it is hoped that the plus and minus errors in
estimating each element in the project plan would offset
each other within the scope of the total project.
However, if the first milestone is missed or required
labor effort is in excess of the original estimate, it is
strongly recommended to conduct a detailed review of all
other milestones and intermediate projections. It may be
possible that revisions in schedules, staffing and costs
are required based on a complete reevaluation of the
project plan and attendant estimates. In his book, "The
Mythical Man Month", Frederick P. Brooks stated that three
weeks before expected delivery, the magnitude of the
underestimate becomes apparent.
58
-------
7.0 Reference Documents
7.1 Federal Procurement Regulation, 41 CFR, Chapters 1 and 2
7.2 Federal Property Management Regulations, 41 CFR, Chapter
101
7.3 EPA ADP Manual
7.4 EPA ADP Documentation Standards
7.5 EPA Contracts Management Manual
7.6 EPA Project Officers Guide
7.7 Guidelines For Preparing and Evaluating Feasibility
Studies
7.8 Guidelines For Preparing Mincomputer Feasibility Studies
7.9 Guidelines For Minicomputer Operations
7.10 Contract Planning and Procurement Request Approval
Requirements (EPA Procurment Information Notice 32-09)-
59
-------
8.0 Appendix
60
-------
8.1 Glossary of Comronly Used Terirs
Assistant Prograir Manager (APM) - a ireirber of the
contractor's iranageirent team.
Agency Procurerrent Request (APR) - a fonral request to the
General Services Administration for authority to procure
ADP services, hardware and systeirs.
Basic Agreement (BA) - an agreement between EPA and a
contractor to provide services and systeirs as ordered.
Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA) - an agreement between EPA
and a contractor to provide predefined services and
systems.
Cost Advisory Board (CAB) - a section of EPA's Procurement
and Contracts Management Division which performs analysis
of cost proposals and commercial accounting practices.
Commerce Business Daily (CBD) - a publication of the Dept.
of Commerce which announces all procurement action and
publishes synopses of Agency requirements.
Contracting Officer (CO) - the EPA official designated as
the only person who is authorized to enter into contracts
and agreements between EPA and Commercial firms.
Contract Ordering Officer - an EPA official designated to
have authority to order contract services and to obligate
EPA funds accordingly.
Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) - a type of contract which pays
all allowable and allocable costs and establishes a base
fee and an award fee based on contractor's performance,
unilaterally determined by EPA.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) - a type of contract which pays
all allowable and allocable costs and a fixed fee.
Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) - a type of contract which
pays all allowable and allocable costs and establishes a
fee based on a predefined formula wich relates to the
contractor's performance ajid achievements.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) - a published
codification of general and permanent rules developed by
Federal agencies persuant to congressional legislation.
Delivery Order (D.O.) - an order for services placed under
a time and materials or labor hours contract.
Directive of Work (D.O.W.) - a order for services placed
under a cost reimbursement contract.
61
-------
Definitive Task Order (D.T.O.) - sirrilar to the D.O.W.
except that the fee is negotiated after requirements and
the contractor's costs are definitized.
Firir Fixed Price (FFP) - a type of contract which
establishes a total fixed price inclusive of fee.
Finr Fixed Price With Economic Price Adjustment (FFP/EPA)
a finr fixed price contract which allows future price
adjustments based on predefined contingency factors.
Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR) - as
promulgated by the General Services Administration,
specific regulations governing the procurement of all ADP
supplies, services, software systems and equipment (i.e.
chapter 101 of the CFR, Title 41).
Federal Procurement Regulations (FPR) - specific
procurement regulations published in the CFR, Title 41,
chapters 1 to 49.
Federal Software Exchange Program (FSEP) - a program
managed by the General Services Administration to promote
the exchange of software among Federal agencies.
Delegation of Procurement Authority (DPA) - authority
granted by the General Services Administration to Federal
agencies for procurement of ADP services, hardware and
software.
Defense Contract Auditing Agency (DCAA) - an Agency within
the Department of Defense which performs audits of
contractor cost proposals and accounting practices and
active contract expenditures. DCAA provides these
services to several Federal agencies continuously.
Direct Labor (D/L) - salary and hourly costs incurred by
the contractor for labor which is directly applied to the
contract.
Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) - ADP
standards developed by the Department of Commerce.
Financial Management Division (FMD) - EPA finance and
accounting organization.
General Accounting Office (GAO) - a Congressional
organization with authority to examine and
approve/disapprove expenditures of Federal agencies.
General and Administrative Expense (G&A) - an expense
incurred by the contractor related to corporate-level
management and marketing.
62
-------
Governrrent Furnished Equipment (GFE) - equipment furnished
by EPA to the contractor during the perfonrance under the
contract. Also, iraterials and property IT ay be required by
the contractor.
Invitation For Bid (IFB) - a solicitation by EPA,
announced in The Coinrerce Business Daily, for cost
proposals for the manufacture or development of specific
products.
Justification For Non-Corrpetitive Procureirent (JNCP) - as
prescribed in Chapter 3 of the Contracts Management
Manual, specific justification narrative to support a sole
source procurement.
Other Direct Costs (O.D.C.) - costs incurred by the
contractor other than direct labor and overhead.
Overhead (0/H) - support costs incurred by the contractor
which are indirectly related to the contract.
Labor/Hour (L/H) - a type of contract which provides labor
at fixed hourly rates.
Level of Effort (LOE) - a predefined quantity of labor
services for a specific period of time.
Project Control Accountant (PCA) - the contractor's
accountant which records and reports labor and financial
resource expenditures incurred during contract
perfonrance.
Period of Perfonrance - authorized time period for
contractor's perfonrance.
Project Officer (P.O.) - EPA's official who represents the
Contracting Officer in providing technical direction to
the contractor.
Program Manager (PM) - the Senior member of the
contractor's management team.
Procurement and Contracts Management Division (PCMD) -
EPA's organization for procurement of services, hardware
and software.
Procurenent Information Notice (PIN) - usually a temporary
directive or policy issued by PCMD governing procurement
actions.
Procurement Request (PR) - EPA Form 1900-8 is used to
describe required services and products, and to cite the
funding sources and management approvals.
63
-------
Procurement Request Rational - the 12-point docuirent which
provides inforiration and clearances about prograir
requirerrents in support of the Procurement Request.
Request For Proposal (RFP) - EPA's fonral solicitation of
technical and cost proposals to provide services or
products as described.
Request For Quotation (RFQ) - EPA's foriral solicitation of
non-binding price quotations for services and products.
Source Evaluation Board (SEE) - appointed by the Director
of PCMD, this board evaluates recommendations of technical
and cost evaluation panels concerning prospective offerers
of services and products in response to IFB's and RFP's.
Statement of Work (S.O.W.) - a statement of the program's
technical and functional requirements for contract
support services or products.
Source Selection Official (S.S.O.) - usually the Director
of PCMD, appointed by the EPA Administrator, with
authority to select the winning offerer for contract
award.
Time and Materials (T/M) - a type of contract which
provides labor at fixed rates and materials at cost plus
G&A.
Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) - a panel of personnel
assigned to review and evaluate technical proposals in
response to RFP's.
Teleprocessing Service Program - a program through which
GSA provides teleprocessing services to Federal agencies.
Termination For Convenience - a contract clause which
provides an option to EPA to cancel a contract in whole or
part.
Termination For Default - a contract clause which provides
EPA a procedure for terminating the contract due to
contractor's failure to perform the required services or
the deliver the required products.
64
-------
8.2 Procurement Request Rationale (i.e 12 Point Document)
1. Title of Project
2. Estimated Period of Performance
3. DOW Project Officer
4. Background
5. Purpose of Contract
6. Procurement Abstract
7. Statement of Work
8. Proposed Budget
9. Reporting Requirements
10. Clearances
11. List of Recommended Sources
12. Evaluation Criteria - for Competitive Procurement
65
-------
8.3 Check List For Review of Procurement Requests
A complete and accurate Procurement Request will
facilitate efficient and timely processing, and early
award of a contract or modification. The following items
should be included is the Procurement Request:
Procurement Request Rationale (see Section 8.2)
Name of Project Officer
Period of Performance
Statement of Work
Proposed Budget (if incrementally funded, state
total budget and available funds)
Proposed vendor and contract number
other information and required
EPA Form 1900-8
Name of orginator and project manager (e.g DOW
Project Officer)
- Name of Vendor with Contract No.
- Appropriation No.
Account No.
- Document Control No.
- Object Class Code (see Section 8.7 for ADP Object
Class Codes)
- Funds Committed
Indicate total budget
- Authorization Signatures
Justification For Non-Competitive Procurement (JNCP)
may be required when not using an existing ADP support
services contract.
66
-------
8.4 Statement of Work Check List
Background
Period of performance
Deliverables
Milestones
DOW Project Officer
Funding Citations and Approvals
Scope of work, technical requirements
Services required
Staffing requirements with qualification statement
Acceptance criteria
Reporting: progress and financial
Technical and progress reviews
Document reviews and comments by EPA
Contingency factors
Project objectives
Program functions to be supported
Description and assessment of experience with methods,
procedures and resources formally or currently used.
Statement of a problem
Target computer facility/system
Place of performance
67
-------
8.5 Sairple Statement of Work
Subtasks
The scope of work to be accoirplished under this task
consists primarily of software iraintenance. This iray
involve an analysis of a proposed irodification to be irade
to an existing program, a redesign phase, a prograir
irodification phase, and the implementation of the modified
program into a multiple systems environment. These
services shall be provided for the hardware and software
available to MVEL including:
a. SEL 32/55 - Real-Time Computer System;
b. AMDAHL 460/V8 - Michigan Terminal System?
c. IBM 370/168 - National Computer Center
d. UNIVAC 1100 - National Computer Center
Each activity to be performed by the contractor shall be
identified as a seperate subtask; there will be both long
term, and short term (one-time) subtasks. Subtasks shall
primarily involve FORTAN IV programming, but may also
involve such work as:
a. Documentation of new and existing programs.
b. Data base modification and creation using EPA approved
Data Base Management systems available on the computer
hardware systems mentioned above.
c. Analysis of proposed modifications to existing and
new systems.
d. Existing program conversion and revision.
Deliverables
Deliverable items for this task are:
a. Program modification analysis reports.
b. Operational computer programs.
c. Documentation in accordance with the EPA national
documentation standards as implemented by the Data and
Systems Staff (DSS).
d. Completed computer runs produced by operational
systems.
e. Updated data bases.
Acceptance Procedures for Deliverables
Output shall be reviewed by the EPA Project Officer or
designee in the MVEL user community, and shall be accepted
when determined to be complete and accurate. Systems
shall be turned over for final inspection after an
operational period of 30 days during which no problems
arise due to contractor developed modifications.
68
-------
Contractor - Project Officer Interaction
The contractor shall provide these services with iriniiral
EPA supervision or direction other than training. The
contractor shall be provided with an ongoing appraisal of
planned activities to be performed. Each activity will be
considered as a separate subtask with an associated
priority and requested date of delivery.
All subtasks will be given to the contractor by the EPA
Project Officer. The contractor iray or iray not receive
detailed design specifications for the proposed software
irodifications on each subtask issued by the Project
Officer. If the EPA subtask requestor already has
detailed specifications of the work to be performed, they
will be included in the subtask request. If the requestor
needs contractor consultation to develop the
specifications, the subtask request will be general in
nature and ask for consultation services. In the latter
case, the contractor will develop and docuirent the
detailed specification through the use of the subtask plan
and the systeir specifications docuirentation. The Project
Officer rrust individually approve the subtask plan and the
redesign development associated with each subtask before
the contractor can proceed with additional work.
Resources to be Provided by the EPA
EPA will provide office space including office furniture
in the MVEl, facility located at 2565 Plyironth Road, Ann
Arbor, Michigan. The contractor will have access to the
necessary coirputer systeirs and the iranuals/docuirents
necessary for work under this task.
Place of Performance
All work will be perforired at the MVEL facility.
Schedule
The contractor shall provide these services for the
duration of this task order on an eight (8) hours per
day - five (5) days per week basis, excluding Federal
holidays and nonral sick and annual leave for contractor
personnel. Request for overtime pay irust have prior
approval of the EPA Project Officer.
Estimate of Staffing
2080 hours of the 'Systems Analyst* skill level is
required. In order to effectively perform in the MVEL
environment, the Analysts should have the following
background:
69
-------
Two years iriniiruir experience programrer/analyst.
Strong experience with irultiple input-output files
in a production applications programring
environment
FORTAN experience
Soire asseirbly language experience desirable
Timesharing systeir experience
70
-------
8.6 Sairple Delivery Order
71
-------
MARK ALL PACKAGES AND PAPERS WITH CONTRACT AND/OR ORDER NUMBERS
1. DATE OF ORDER 2 CONTRACT NO (it any) 3 OROER NO PAGE 1 OF
4issuiNGOF Environmental Protection Agency, Management Information and Data
SyBt-»rr,e nivininn (PM-21R) Washington, D.C. 20460
5. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA
See Page 2 Totals $108,300.00 ST. DIST. CITY CT
"5T" "oio" UV2UU TJT
a SHIP TO (Conngnaa and Address. ZIP Coda)
Richard Laska
EPA (PP-674) WaFjh \ ni +tvr\ t T
7. TO: CONTRACTOR fWa'nw, AdoVes*. ZWCode) *
COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPC
Applied Technology Div 2
6565 Arlington Blvd.
Falls Church, Virginia
9 REQUISITION ^,
OFFICE ~ /
11 F.O B POINT ' ' if
VIA
1TC- 204fiO
JRATION
Lsion
22046 .
V '
' \
'12 GOVERNMENT B/L NO
8 TYPE OF OROER
Please furnish the following on the terms specified on both
sides ol Ihis order and on the attached sheets, if any,
including delivery as indicated This purchase is negotiated
undar authority ol
QjH Delivery Except for billing instructions on the
reverse, this delivery order is subject to instructions
contained on this side only ol this form and is issued subject
to the terms and conditions of the above-numbered contract
10 REQUISITION NO /PURCHASE AUTHORITY
\*M si D 3V?
13 DELIVERY TO F OB 14 DISCOUNT TERMS
POINT OH OR BEFORE
Mav 22, 1981
/ 15. SCHEDULE 'See reverse for reieciions
Item No.
1.
Supf&ws or Serviced
General ADP Programming Services
as per attached
Statement of Wor
(Complement to 6360-41). The
effort shall be
accompl ished
with the following categories
and established
hours of labor:
Task 1; Technical Project Leader
Programmer/Analyst
Senior Programmer
Task 2:Technical Project Leader
Programmer/Analyst
Senior Programmer
Item 1. Total
Quantity
Ordered
(e)
k.
A
m<&
1000
800
500
900
1000
Unit
(d)
Hr
Hr
Hr
Hr
Hr
Hr
Unit Price
3 24.53
s 21.15
s 18.09
s 24.53
s 21.15
s 18.09
1t CLASSIFICATION- RCMAH RiKSiNeesc H OTHER THAN ' ri MINORITY BUSINESS
mbutaMfiMtiiUN. U SMALL BUSINESS 4»MALL BUSINESS U ENTERPRISE
SEE
BILLING
INSTRUC-
REVERSE
17. SHIPPING POINT
18 GROSS SHIPPING WEIGHT
19 INVOICE NO
20. MAIL INVOICE TO (inctuot ZIP co
-------
ST»NOi!iO c<~-v
"""CC BEG
ORDER FOR SUPPLIES OR SERVICES
SCHEDULE-CONTINUATION
ITEM NO
2.
3.
4.
5.
SUPPLIES OR SERVICES
MARK ALL PACKAGES A.\D PAPERS KITH ORDLR A\D. OR
CONTRACT \UMBERs1 T
DATE Or ORDER
Program Support for this task will
require these following categories and
established hours and rates:
Assistant Program Manager
Project Control Accountant
Travel and per diem and supplies
associated with program support, but
not to exceed the amount of $1376.33.
This effort will require travel and
per diem, training, and miscellaneous,
as approved in advance by the EPA
Delivery Order Project Officer, not to
exceed $4687.57.
Other Direct Costs in the following
estimated amounts shall be required
and billed at costs:
NONE
Block 5 -ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION D
C-l 681 0200 L05001 1ABK265101 25.22 (:
C-l 681 0200 L06001 1ABU265101 25.22 (
C-l 681 0200 L09001 1ACQ265101 25.22 (
C-l 681 0200 L04002 1ABD265101 25.22 (
C-l 681 0200 L00002 1CAE26S103 25.22 {
TOTALS
The period of performance shall be
date of issue to Sept. 30, 1981.
The Project Officer for this Delivery
Order No. 6363-11 is:
Richard Laska
EPA
(RD-674)
Washington, D. C. 20460
Invoices shall be sent to the
Project Officer for this contract,
John J. Hart.
ONTHACT NO (If any}
8-01-6363
QUANTITY
ORDERED
00 f
80 I
/TA:
2) $26
2) 24
!2) 36
2) 7
12) 13
$ltfS
NIT
R5
RS
90(
00(
,20(
,90(
,30(
1 1U
UNIT
PRICE
7.65
7.27
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
TOTAL CARRIED FORWARD TO 1ST PAGE M^BB^
PAGE NC
2
3RDER NO
6363-11
AMOUNT
530.00
108.60
1376.33
4687.57
0.00
14702.5
QUANTITY
ACCEPTED
5T110ARO 'OHM I4B JUHC <»•!
73
-------
8.7 ADP Object Classes
Rental of ADP
23.02 ADP Software Packages
23.03 Coirputer and ADP Equipment Rentals
23.04 ADP Data Phone Rentals
Other Contractual Services
25.18 Coirputer Faclities and Services
25.20 ADP Operational Support Services
25.21 Maintenance of Data Processing Equipment
25.22 ADP Planning Studies
25.23 ADP Infonration Systeirs Studies
Supplies
26.04 Data Processing Supplies
Purchasing of ADP
31.12 Data Processing Equipment
31.13 Peripheral Data Processing Equipment
74
-------
8.8 Sairple Technical Proposal Instructions
75
-------
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS:
This information will facilitate evaluation of each
offerer's proposal. Offerers are advised to supply all
information in the sequence and format specified below.
Failure to furnish all information requested may result in
disqualification. The offeror must submit a proposal and
supporting data comprehensive enough to provide a thorough
basis for supporting technical evaluation by EPA. The
information provided should be precise, factual and
responsive. Proposal content must include, but is not
limited to, the following items of information. Statement
and reponses to questions must follow the order indicated
below:
a. Company and Location (Include sub-contractors, and
consultants, if any.)
(1) Name of Company.
(2) Address of Company headquarters and branch
offices.
(3) List ADP/telecommunication support equipment
that is available for and applicable to the
performance of this requirement located on company
premises by make and model.
(4) If no equipment on premises, list any
facilities or equipment which will be available for
your use in the performance of Funded Work
Assignments resulting from contract award.
b. Technical Approach
(1) Provide a fully supported narrative showing
your understanding of this EPA requirement from a
technical perspective, including an understanding of
information processing within EPA, and of ADP
planning functions and methods. (A mere
restatement of information contained in this
solicitation will not be considered to reflect an
understanding of this requirement.)
(2) Describe your overall Technical Approach and
present a clear explanation of specifically how you
plan to provide for the technical aspects of the
required service. Submission of practical, yet
refined, methods which will offer EPA substantial
operating cost benefits while insuring technical
quality will be given significant consideration in
the evaluation of proposals. Provide sketches,
76
-------
drawings, charts, etc., as you deem appropriate.
(3) If you recognize interrelated tasks or phases,
you should prepare a seperate section which shows
such relationship.
(4) Indicate the technical problems that are
expected to be encountered and described the methods
proposed to solve them.
c. Management Approach
(1) Provide a fully supported narrative showing
your understanding of this EPA requirement from a
managerial perspective. (A mere restatement of
information contained in this solicitation will not
be considered to reflect an understanding of this
requirement.)
(2) Prepare a Management Plan that addresses as a
minumum the following topics:
(a) delivery orders review
(b) development of project plans
(c) labor skill mix determination
(d) monitoring and control of service
provided: technical quality,
responsiveness, cost control, effective
and efficient resource utilization,
compliance with technical requirements,
and contract provisions. Clearly show
proposed information flow, proposed
systems for cost monitoring and control,
proposed systems for quality control;
proposed systems for management control
and contract provision compliance.
(e) suggestions as to how the deliverables
requirements, expressed or
implied in the Statement of Work, can be
most effectively produced to attain EPA
objectives.
(f) proposed approach to assure quality
control of work performed.
(3) Indicate any anticipated managerial problems
and describe the methods you proposed to solve them.
(4) Indicate how personnel assigned to this effort
will be organized and how they relate to the
performance of this requirement at both management
and technical levels.
(5) Indicate the proposed working relationships
between Offeror personnel and the EPA Contract
77
-------
Project Officer and EPA DO Project Officers.
(6) Indicate how your proposed approach would
assure user satisfaction with the products of this
contract.
(7) Indicate how you will provide for the security
of sensitive information.
(8) Provide a summary of basic company personnel
administration policies as they relate to leave
practices, overtime or premium pay, normal work
hours, career development training, assignment
rotation, performance evaluation, and any incentive
or morivational arrangements.
d. Project Managers
(1) indicate the names of key management personnel
who will be assigned and committed to this contract.
Indicate their functions on this contract.
(2) Provide the resumes of each employee with
managerial responsibilities who will be assigned to
this contract, include the following items in the
resumes:
(a) Company Position Title/Proposed Contract
Position Title
(b) Name
(c) Number of years experience in ADP field
(d) Full-time, part-time or subcontract
employee
(e) Length of time with Company
(f) Education. Indicate degrees awarded,
dates, major subjects
(g) indicate the extent of managerial
experience directly applicable to the
requirements of this solicitation!
(1) Information management projects
including planning, requirement analyses,
feasibility studies and systems
evaluations.
(2) Business and scientific application
systems development experience.
78
-------
(3) Computer programming an' operating
system experience (indicate languages and
systems types relevant to EPA, such as
FORTRAN, COBOL, etc.
(4) Telecommunications or data
communications hardware experience
(indicate equipment types(s) and extent
of experience).
(5) Data Base Management Systems
experience, in particular IDMS, DMS-1100,
52K
(3) Indicate the proposed level, stature and
capabilities of project managers. The offerers
project management should have experience managing
services of this comparable type and complexity
within the past five (5) years. The placement of
these project managers in the offerer's coporate
organization should insure: (a) the availability of
of qualified personnel resources that will produce
high quality products and services; (b) adequate
attention of upper level corporate management.
(4) Indicate the relationship of the project
organization to the organization of the firm.
(5) Indicate the extent of involvement of other
individuals or organizational elements of the firm
e.g., top management, specialized consultants,
subcontractors, and support groups; stating the type
of activity each would be called upon to perform
and approximate percent of time for each.
e. Professional Staff Qualifications
(1) Provide the names and resumes of key employees
who will be assigned to this contract. Include the
following items in the resumes:
(a) Company Position Title/Proposed Contract
Position Title
(b) Number of years experience in ADP field
(c) Pull-time, part-time or subcontract
(d) Length of time with Company
(e) Education, indicate degrees awarded,
dates major subjects
(f) Indicate the extent or experience directly
79
-------
applicable to the his requirement;
(1) information management projects
including planning, requirements
analyses, feasibility studies and systems
evaluation.
(2) Business and scientific application
systems development experience (or and
extent of eperience).
(3) Computer programming and on
operating system experience (indicate
languages and system types relevant to
EPA such as FORTAN, COBOL, etc.
(4) Telecommunications or data
communications hardware experience
(indicate equipment types(s) and extent
of experience).
(5) Data Base Management Systems
experience, in particular IDMS, DMS-1100,
S2K
(2) Discuss the proposed professional staff's
turnover rates and average length of company service
for all categories- of personnel. Provide a
statement of your firm's ability to retain proposed
professionals on this work effort.
(3) Discuss your methods of obtaining additional
individuals to augment the proposed staff, if needed
by increased EPA requirments.
(4) Indicate whether all personnel proposed for
work under this RFP are currently employed by the
offerer or by a subcontractor, and whether they
would be definitely committed to this project if an,
award was made or are only representative or
available staff.
(f) Corporate Experience and Capacity
(1) List and describe projects performed or being
performed for both Federal and non-Federal agencies
and commerical clients that are directly related to
this requirement.
(2) Indicate date of work, level of effort
involved, names address, and telephone numbers of
references regarding above projects. These
references will be contacted and their responses
will be incorporated into the evaluation of
30
-------
corporate experience.
(3) Indicate whether recommendations or systems
developed were subsequently implemented by the
client and whether they are now in an operational
status.
(4) Provide information regarding any possible
commitments including key personnel which might
conflict with the timely performance of this
requirement.
(5) Supply a statement as to the priortiy your firm
would place upon this work effort as compared to
other commitments now extant or reasonably to be
expected during the estimated contract period of
performance.
(6) Include with your proposal one copy of the
following three (3) separate deliverable items that
you have developed for a previous effort which is
most representative of the type of deliverable
required by this solicitation:
0 information management requirements analysis
and determination,
0 feasibility study of ADP-related alternative
approaches,
0 general and detailed design document and
functional description.
(7) For each such documentation item submitted,
indicate the planned and actual time and cost
schedules for their preparation. In the case of
actual costs higher than planned, or more time than
planned for their production, provide a narrative
explanation.
(8) Indicate experience, if any, with Work
Assignment/Directive of Work/Task Order types of
contracts.
(9) Indicate total employment of the firm by major
skill category.
81
-------
EVALUATION PURPOSES
WORK ASSIGNMENT TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
Prepare a technical proposal responding to the Evaluation
Purposes Work Assignment. Your technical response to the
Evaluation Purposes Work Assignments will be a part of your
Technical Proposal.
Your technical approach should incorporate the following:
a. Understanding of Work Assignment. Offerer's
statement and discussion of requirements that reflects
both a managerial and technical understanding of the
Work Assignment. Discuss any assumptions arising from,
interpretations of, qualifications to, limitations upon,
deviations from, or exceptions to the Evaluation
Purposes Statement of Work requirements.
b. Work Plan. A thorough outline and description of
services to be provided, milestones to be met, and items
to be delivered, quality control mechanisms, and
procedures. Description of the offerer's technical
approach and a statement to which the offerer's
technical approach can be expected to meet or exceed
Work Assignment requirements and specifications. A
differentiation shall be made among areas of assured
compliance with requirements, possible but not assured
compliance with requirements. If, in the opinon of the
offerer, a requirement or specification of the Work
Assignment cannot be satisfied, the offeror shall so
state, and shall indicate the reasons for the statement,
and may also suggest or recommend an alternative or
comprise approach for consideration.
c. Project Personnel. Presentation of all personnel
who would be assigned for performance of the Evaluation
Purposes Work Assignment, including those who are
directly or indirectly responsible managerially,
technically and administratively. Special mention shall
be made of key personnel and the approximate percentage
of the total time each will be available for this Work
Assignment. Names of individuals proposed shall be
coupled with their respective project assignments or
labor categories. Include resumes which will indicate
recent related experience and specific technical or
professional accomplishments. Specify the assigned
functional responsibilities assigned to each personnel
proposed for the evaluation purposes work assignments.
82
-------
8.9 Sairple Technical Proposal Evaluation
Criteria
83
-------
Evaluation Criteria
I. Notice to Offerors
A. Any contract(s) resulting from this solicitation will be
awarded to that responsible offerer whose offer conforming to
the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government,
price and other factors considered. Selection of an offer
for negotiation and award shall be accomplished in accordance
with FPR 1-3.805 and the EPA Source Evaluation and Selection
Procedures (available upon request). Significant features of
the EPA procedures are:
1. Proposals will be evaluated and scored based upon
the offerors response to the solicitation. Evaluation
and scoring will be conducted in accordance with the
evaluation criteria set forth in the solicitation.
Proposal evaluation will consider responsiveness of the
offer to solicitation technical objectives and the such
other factors as may be included in the evaluation
criteria.
2. The offerer's price and other factors which are
contained in the solicitation will be evaluated.
Neither price nor other factors, unless specifically
identified and assigned weights in the evaluation
criteria, will be point scored.
3. The competitive range will be determined based upon
the scoring of the technical proposal, the evaluation of
price and the consideration of other factors.
Discussions, either written or oral, will be conducted
when two or more offerors are determined to be within
the competitive range (See PPR 1-3.805-1(1} through (5)
for exception to the rule regarding discussions). The
purpose of discussions is to clarify or to substantiate
uncertainties in the solicitation or proposal. However,
discussions shall not involve identification of proposal
deficiencies. At the conclusion of discussions,
offerors will be allowed to submit revisions to their
proposal; such revisions to be received by a time and
date specified.
4. Upon receipt, the revised proposal will be
re-evalated and scored in accordance with the
solicitation evalution criteria, and other factors,
which are a prerequisite for award or which may
influence the award decision, will be considered.
Thereafter, a source(s) is selected for final
negotiations. Deficiencies in the proposal shall be
discussed and resolved, and the award made.
B. Evaluation of offers shall follow the evalution criteria
set forth herein.
84
-------
EPA primarily seeks technical excellence in its acquisition
programs. Accordingly, unless price or cost is set forth in
the evaluation criteria as a factor to be evaluated and
scored, price or cost is secondary to technical quality.
C. Technical evaluation of offers shall follow the
evaluation criteria set forth below.
D. In additon to the evaluation of the technical merit and
the price or cost, consideration will be given to other
factors concerning assesment of an offerer's responsibility
and which are prerequisites for award. Also, appropriate
consideration of the degree of compliance or the relative
strengths and weaknesses of such other factors can influence
the evaluation of offers. Consideration of other factors are
specifically expressed in the evaluation criteria for scoring
purposes or, whether they are implied by law, regulation of
the public policy, may determine the offerers acceptability.
E. Option years will be evaluated both technically and for
cost.
II. Techncial evaluation of the offerer's technical proposal
will encompass both the evaluation of the offerer's proposal
for providing the required services and the offerer's
response to the Evaluation Purposes Work Assignment.
A. Technical Approach Total points
(30)
1. Demonstrated understanding of this requirement
from a technical perspective (A mere restatement
of information contained elsewhere in this
solicitation will not be considered to reflect
an understanding of this requirements.)
8
2. Soundness of overall Technical Approach and
explanation of specifically how the offerer
plans to provide for technical aspects of the
required service. (Submission of practical,
yet refined methods which will offer EPA
substantial operating cost benefits while
insuring technical quality will be given higher
consideration in the evaluation of proposals.)
15
3. Type and degree of insight of technical problems
expected to be encountered and the orignality
and validity of their solution.
B. Management Approach Total points
(30)
85
-------
2.
Demonstrated understanding of this requirement
from a managerial perspective (A mere
restatement of information contained elsewhere
in this solicitation will not be considered
to reflect an understanding of this requirement).
Soundness of Management Plan addressing the topics
set forth in the Technical Proposal Instructions.
Type of degree of insight of managerial problems
expected to be encountered and the originality
and validity of their solution.
3. Availability of sufficient and qualified management
resources (either in-house or by subcontracting support),
including how such personnel assigned to this
effort will be organized and how they relate
to the performance of this requirement at both
management and technical levels. Also, indicate
the proposed working relationships between offeror
personnel and the EPA Contract Project Officer
and EPA Work Assignment Project Officers.
15
C. Project Managers Total Points
(30)
Availability of qualified project managers with demon-
strated experience in supervising services similar
to those set forth in this requirements, and with experience
in systems, software, and hardware used by EPA.
30
D. Key Professional Staff Qualifications Total Points
(50)
Demonstrated directly applicable experience
of key personnel proposed in information system
management planning studies, feasibility studies
and system evaluation (business and scientific
applications development experience, computer
programming and operating system experience,
tele-communications or data communications experience),
using data base and distributed hardware systems
such as those used in EPA.
50
E. Corporate Experience and Capacity Total Points
(20)
1. Demonstrated corporate experience whose
86
-------
technical content, magnitude and complexity is
similar to the requirements of this solicitation.
5
2. Technical content and presentation format of the
three (3) representative deliverable items.
10
3. Demonstrated Corporate experience successfully
supporting similar requirements for the Federal
Government, using Work Assignments Directive of
Work/Task Order types of contracts.
F. Evaluation Purposes Work Assignment Total Points
(40)
1. Degree of understanding of Evaluation Purposes
Work Assignment requirements (and assumptions,
interpretations , qualifications , limitations ,
deviations, or exceptions). 10
2. Comprehensiveness, degree of insight and
thoroughness of the technical approach and
work plan to fulfill the requirements set
forth in the appropriate Evaluation Purposes
Work Assignment. ' 10
4. Appropriateness and qualifications of project
personnel who would be directly £r indirectly '
assigned for the performance of the Evaluation
Purposes Work Assignment.
20
Total Solicitation points
200
87
-------
8.10 Sairple Technical Evaluation Work Sheet
88
-------
Technical Evaluator's Work Sheet
Evaluatori
Score = Height x Value
Value Range = 1-5
Name of Offerer:
Weight Value Score
RFP: WA80 - P024 Date:
00
VO
A. Technical Approach
1. Soundness of overall Technical
Approach and explanation of
specifically how the offerer
plans to provide for technical
aspects of the required service.
(Submission of practical, yet
refined methods which will offer
EPA substantial operating cost
benefits while insuring technical
quality will given higher
consideration in the
evaluation of proposals.)
2. Demonstrated understanding of
this requirement from a technical
perspective (A mere restatement of
information contained elsewhere in
this solicitation will not be
considered to reflect an
understanding of these
requirements.)
3. Type and degree of insight of
technical problems expected to
be encountered and the originality
and validity of their solution.
B. Management Approach and Project
Total Points
(30)
15
1. Soundness of Management Plan
addressing the topics set forth
in the Technical Proposal
Instructions.
Total Points
(60)
20
2. Availability of qualified
project managers with demonstrated
experience in supervising services
similar to those set forth in this
requirements. (See Note, Evaluation
Criteria page 4 of 4 pages.) 15
Comments
-------
TECHNICAL EVALUATOR'S WORK SHEET
Name of Offerer:
RFP: WA80 - D02l> Date:
Ci\
Scoi
.Vali
c.
D.
•e = Weight X Value Weight
3. Type and degree of insight of
managerial problems expected to be
encountered and the originality and
validity of their solution. 9
4. Demonstrated understanding of
this requirement from a managerial
perspective (A mere restatement
of information contained elsewhere
in this solicitation will not be
considered to reflect an
understanding of this
requirement). 8
5. Availability of sufficient
management sources (either in-house
or by subcontracting support) . 8
Professional Staff Qualifications Total Points
(30)
1. Demonstrated experience directly
applicable to the Service Area
proposed (business and scientific
applications development experience.
computer programming and operating
system experience, telecommunications
or data communications experience) .
(See Note. Evaluation criteria page
4 of 4) 20
2. Availability of sufficient
professional staff resources
(either in-house or by
sub-contracting support). 10
Corporate Experience and Capacity Total Points
(40)
1 . Demonstrated corporate
experience whose technical
content, magnitude and
complexity is similar to
the relevant Service Area. 20
Value
Score
Garments
-------
Bvaluator:
Score » •Weight x Value
Value Range « 1-5
Technical Evaluator's Work Sheet
Name of OCferon BFPi WA80 - P024 Date:
Height ! Value Score CommentB
to
H
2. Technical content and
presentation format of the
three (3) representative
deliverable items. (See,
Technical Proposal
Instructions page S of 6).
3. Demonstrated Corporate
experience successfully
supporting similar requirements
for the Federal Government.
4. Demonstrated corporate
experience in responding to
Work Assignment Directive of
Work/Task order types of contracts.
E. Evaluation Purposes Work Assignment
1. Comprehensiveness, degree of
insight and thoroughness of the
technical approach and work plan
to fulfill the requirements aet
forth in the appropriate Evaluation
Purposes Work Assignment.
2. Degree of understanding of
Evaluation Purposes Work Assignment
requirements (and assumptions,
interpretations, qualifications,
limitations, deviations, or
exceptions).
3. Comphensivenesa, degree of
insight and thoroughness of
fulfillment of requirement
discussion, (statement of the
extent to which the offerors
technical approach can be
expected to meet or exceed Work
Assignment requirements and
specifications.)
4. Appropriateness and
qualifications of project
personnel who would be directly or
indirectly assigned for the perform-
ance of the Evaluation Purposes Work
Asslgrments
10
Total
(40)
Poll
IS
ts
8
-------
Evaluator:
Name of Offeror:
Technical Evaluator'a Work Sheet
RFP: HA80 - D024 Date:
vo
ISJ
Suimarlzed Conmenta
Strength of This Proposal>
Weaknesses of this proposal:
-------
8.11 Guidelines For Acceptance of Delivered Products and
Services
The purpose of these guidelines is to promote quality
assurance during the performance of contract support
services and development of products such as technical
study reports, design documents and software systems.
These guidelines highlight several key issues which the
Project Officer should consider during the inspection and
acceptance phase of a contract project. The significance
of these issues will vary according to the type of
project, the services provided by the contractor, and the
expected results. The reference documents listed in
Section 7.0 will provide detailed guidance for feasibility
studies and systems documentation.
There are two types of projects: the completion type
which results in the development and implementation of a
technical report, system design document or application
system software; and the term type which requires
technical support using various labor classifications for
a definite period of time.
The project statement of work will reflect the type of
project and will employ either a general structure which
ris suitable for exploratory support such as requirements
analyses, or a specific structure which defines the
subtasks services required to produce pre-established
product objectives. Whenever practical, statements of
work should specify required delivery schedules, interim
milestones, progress reporting requirements, and staff
qualrification requirements.
The contractor's proposal or project/staffing plan which
usually is prepared as a response to a statement of work
should be evaluated for adequacy in terms of the following
rfactors:
technical understanding of the requirements,
proposed technical approach,
proposed management approach and project controls,
proposed project plan with work breakdown, schedules,
milestones, staffing plan with qualification
statements,
cost projections with breakdown of cost elements such
as labor classifications, labor hours, rates, and
other direct costs,
proposed test plan.
Document deliverables should be evaluated in terms of:
completeness and thoroughness,
substantive discussions with supporting details,
structure and ease of use,
conformance with applicable Federal and Agency
93
-------
standards.
The Contractor's progress and financial reports should be
evaluated in terms of timeliness, accuracy, quality of
reporting, and identification and resolution of problems.
The Contractor's performance should be evaluated in terms
of:
quality of services and deliverables,
conformance with technical and functional
requirements,
conformance to schedule requirements,
conformance to budget constraints,
adequacy of project management and controls,
competence of project staffing.
The Contractor's Project management performance can be
further evaluated in terms of:
management involvement and participation,
project planning and control,
problem detection and resolution,
contingency planning.
Evaluation of system design documents should include
consideration of the following features:
(1) System level functional flow diagram
Identifies all major subsystems,
Specifically indicates all major functions
preformed.
Identifies all major input/output files and
reports.
(2) System technical description which
Identifies all major subsystems, program modules
and subroutines, which are system components,
Abstract description of each system component,
Logic flow diagrams for each system component,
Functional specification for each system component
(i.e. a list of each discrete function performed),
Associated Input/Output files,
Data elements dictionary pertaining to each system
component (e.g. input/output paramenters, internal
94
-------
control parameters, intermediate storage
parameters),
Related mathematical models,
Program (subsystem) interface specifications (e.g.
parameters passed between programs).
(3) Input/Output Files Which are Characterised in terms of:
Storage medium,
File name, data set name, Volume ID,
Related Program Modules,
Size,
Characteristics (e.g. numeric, binary, floating
point, etc.),
Data elements included,
Purpose,
Record Layouts.
(4) Reports and Graphic Displays which provide:
List of reports and graphs,
Purpose,
Data elements included,
Related programs,
Data Source (e.g. File name, etc.),
Report Format,
Sample illustration of graphic display annotations
and scales.
(5) System Test Plan which include:
Functions to be executed,
Expected output results,
Programs to be tested.
Source and characteristics of input test data
95
-------
(6) Future Requirements
Occasionally, not all requirements have been
adequately specified. Detailed design, therefore, will be
contingent on the availability of additional information,
specifications, models, data, etc. An attempt should be
made to isolate future requirements and describe them
wherever feasible. The following are a few examples to be
considered:
Functions and models
Program modules anticipated.
Data requirements
Action items which require additional effort for
requirements review, systems analysis and design,
fact finding, testing, etc.
96
-------
8.12 Procedures For Inspection and Acceptance of Contractor
Performance on Delivery Orders, and Certification of
Contractor Invoices
1. Who uses this procedure? All Delivery Order Project
Officers responsible for established Delivery Orders
(D.O.) under one or more of the MIDSD ADP Service
contracts. These D.O.s will be monitored by each
individual Project Officer. Invoices will be paid upon
certification by the Contract Ordering Officer in MIDSD.
2. Each month, the contractor will submit an invoice and
supporting information for each Delivery Order to the
MIDSD Contract Ordering Officer with a copy to the EPA
D.O. Project Officer. Upon receipt of the contractor's
invoice and supporting documentation, the D.O. Project
Officer must sign a copy of the invoice signifying
approval of the charges and send it The Contract Ordering
Officer at MIDSD.
If any or all of the charges are not approved, the D.O.
Project Officer must send a written statement to the
Contract Ordering Officer specifying the charges to be
suspended or disallowed and the reason.
97
-------
8.13 Notice of Task Completion
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Contract No. 68-01-3840; D-DOW-3840-
Directive of Work Certification of Completion
TO:
FROM: John J. Hart, Project Officer (PM-218)
Development, Maintenance & Operation (DM&O) Contract
It is requested that you certify the satisfactory completion of
the effort set forth in the subject Directive of Work (DOW) by
signing in the designated space below.
Date of Acceptance DOW Project Officer (Signature)
of DOW Services and
Deliverables
DOW Project Officer (£?yped or
Printed)
The original of this memorandum and two (2) copies are to be
returned to my attention at:
Management Information and Data Systems
Division (PM-218)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
The remaining copy may be retained for your records.
No additional work shall be performed under the subject DOW
after it has been certified as completed and closed.
99
-------
8.14 GSA Regulations For ADP Procurement
100
-------
Monday
January 5r 1981
Part VI
General Services
Administration
Automated Data and Telecommunications
Government-Wide- Procurement and
Management of Automatic Data
Processing
101
-------
1196
Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 2 / Monday, January 5.1981 / Rules and Regulations
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Part 1-4
IFPH Amendment 211]
Automatic Data Processing
Contracting; Special Types and
Methods of Procurement
AGENCY: General Services
Administration.
ACTION; Fiaal rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation provides a
complete revision of Subpart 1-4.11
regarding procurement and contracting
policies relating to the acquisitionW
automatic data processing (ADPf
equipment, commercially available
software, maintenance services, and
related* supplies by Federal agencies and
in some situations, by Government
contractors* This action is needed to
change, consolidate, and clarify policy
and procedures. The intended effect is
to increase economy and efficiency and
to reduce paperwork regarding agency
ADP resources acquisition..
EFFECTIVB DATE This regulation is
effective January 15.1981. but may be
• observed earlier.
FOR FURTHBR INFORMATION CONTACTS
Philip G. Read. Federal Procurement
Regulations Directorate. Office of
Acquisition Policy. 703-557-8947.
SUPPUMEMTARY INFORMATION? (a) A
proposed revision of Subpart 1-4»11 (and
FPMR Subpart 101-35.2) was circulated
to all Federal agencies and other
interested parties on May 28,1980. The
closing of the comment period was
November 14.1980 (45 FR 71628.
October 29,1980). Ail comments
received have been considered and
accommodated to the extent considered
appropriate.
(b) A complete revision of Subpart 1-
4.11 is provided. Substantive changes
from the existing coverage an as
follows:
(1) A new § 1-4.1100-2 is added to
explain the relationship of Subpart 1-
4.11 to other procurement regulations,
replacing § 1-4.1101-1.
(2) A new § 1^4.1100-3 is added to
control deviations from Subpart l-i4.ll.
(3) Section 1-4.1101 is revised to
clarify the applicability of Subpart 1-
4JI to both Federal agencies and
Government contractors.
(4) Subsection 1-4.1102-1 js revised to
redefine the ternr "automatic data
processing equipment"
(5) Subsection 1-4.1102-2 is revised to
redefine the term-'software" and to add
definitions for related terms, including
commercially available-software.
(6) Subsection 1-4.1102-3 is revised to
add the term "firmware"; §' 1-4.1102-6 is
revised to add remote terminal
emulation terms.
(7) Subsection 1-4.1102-7 is revised to
define the term "competitive
requirement," and § 1-4.1102-8 is
revised to define the term
"noncompetitive (sole source)
requirement," replacing §81-4.1102-16
and 1-4.1102-17.
(8) Subsection 1-4.1102-9 is revised to
define the term "maximum practicable
competition." consistent with paragraph
(c) of § 1-3.101.
(9) Subsection 1-4.1102-10 is revised
to clarify the term "lowest overall cost"
replacing § 1-4.1102-14.
(10) Subsection 1-4.1102-12 is revised
to define the term "functional __
specifications." replacing § 1-f 1102-7.
"data system specifications."
(11) Subsection 1-4.1102-16 is revised
to define the meaning of the term
"evaluated optional features," replacing
§ 1-4.1102-13. "desirable features."
(12) Other subsections in § 1-4.1102 -
are rearranged and modified.
(13) Section 1-4.1103 is added to state
the general policies and procedures
relating to competition, requirements
analysis, urgent requirements, major
system acquisition, and small business
and labor surplus area concerns.
(14} Section 1-4.1104 is revised to add
a provision prohibiting fragmenting
requirements in order to circumvent
established thresholds, replacing 91-
4.1103.
(15). Subsection 1-4.1104-1 is revised
to-increaae agency procurement
authority for ADPE under competitive
solicitation procedures, replacing FPR
Temp. Reg. 46 provisions;
(16KSubsection 1-4.1104-2 is revised
to increase agency procurement
authority for commercially available
software under competitive solicitation
procedures, replacing FPR Temp. Reg. 46
provisions.
(17) Subsection. 1-4.1104-3 is revised
to increase agency procurement
authority for maintenance services
under competitive solicitation
procedures, replacing FPR Temp. Reg. 46
provisions.
(18) Subsection 1-4.1104^4 is added to
provide agency procurement authority
for related supplies.
- (19) Subsection 1-4.1104-5 regarding
the ADP is revisedvfot clarity, replacing
.§ 1-4.1103-4.
(20) Section 1-4.1105 is revised to
include in the Agency Purchase Request
data concerning computer security
requirements, use of compatibility
limited requirements, and software
conversion studies, where applicable.
replacing $ 1-4.1104.
(21) Section 1-4.1106 is revised to
clarify the 20-day automatic delegation
procedure, replacing § 1-4.1105.
(22) Section 1-4.1106-1 and -2 and
§ 1-4.1107 are revised for clarity,
replacing §§ 1-4.1105-1 and 1-4.1108.
(23) Subsection 1-4.1108 is revised to
set forth responsibilities applicable to
the acquisition of major ADP systems
•under OMB Circular A-109, replacing
FPR Temp. Reg. 47. -
(24) Section 1-4.1109 is added to
replace § 1-4.1107 provisions.
(25) Subsection 1-4.1109-2 is added to
clarify documentation provisions.
replacing § 1-4.1107-2. Section 1-4.1107-
20, sole source procurement
documentation, is removed.
(26) Subsection 1-4.1109-3 is added to
incorporate the optional use of GSA's
centralized Bidders Mailing Ust (BLM),
replacing § 1-4.1107-3 as changed by
FPR Amendment 210.
(27) Subsection 1-4.1109-t is reserved.
(28) Subsection 1-4.1109-5 regarding
small purchase is added, replacing § 1-
4.1107-4 appearing in FPR Temp Reg. 46.
(29) Subsection 1-4.1109-6 regarding
use of GSA schedule contracts is added '
to clarify and amplify existing
provisions, replacing § 1-4.1107-6
appearing in FPR Temp Reg. 46.
(30) Subsections 1-4.1109-7 and -8 are.
added, replacing §§ 1-4.1107^7 and -6
respectively.
(31) Subsection 1-4.1109-0 regarding
handling of late responses is added.
replacing Si 1-4.1107-9 and 1-4.1108-1.
(32) Subsections 1-4.1109-10 and -11
regarding use of specifications are
added, replacing §§ 1-4.1107-10 and -11.
(33) Subsections 1-4.1109-12, -13. -14.
and -15 are added to provide extensive
new provisions concerning compatibility
limited requirements, requirements for
software conversion studies.
determination of conversion costs, and
determination of selection factors. The
provisions of FPMR Temp. Reg. F-492/ to
the extent that they are in conflict are
superseded.
(34) Subsections 1-4.1109-16 and -17
regarding software procurement and
procurement of related supplies are
added, replacing §§ 1-4.1107-16 and -17,
respectively.
(35) Subsection 1-4.1109-18 is added
to provide new provisions (identical to
FPMR § 101-35.203-10 provisions)
regarding-nimishing ADP items-and
services to contractors.
(36) Subsection 1-4.1109-19 regarding
purchase options for contractor acquired
ADPE is added, replacing § 1-4.1107-1».
. (37) Subsection 1-4.1109-20 is added
to incorporate computer security
requirements, replacing 5 1-4.1107-21 as
added by FPR Amendment 210.
102
-------
Federal togrter / Vbk 46. Wo. 2 / Monday; January 5. 1981- /' Rules and' Regulations
1187
(38) Subsection I-4.H09-2I regarding
the uee of simulation- is added, replacing
§ 1-4.110T-51
(39) Subsections 1-4.1109-22 and -23
regarding, use of, benchmarks and remote
terminal emulation are added, replacing,
{ 1-4.1107-5 and FPR Temp. Reg. 49
provisions.
(40) Subsection l-tno9-2« is added
to include conversion costs under
evaluation factors., replacing 5 T-4.nOT-
13.
(41) Subsection 1-4.1109-2$ regarding,
implementation of standards fs added.
replacing I T-4.ZI08-5 aa amended* by
FPR Amendment 210.
(421 Section l-4.ina regarding
standard clauses fs added, replacing
§ 1-4 J108T ana* f I-untM replaces
J 1-4.HOB-Z
(43 J Subsection. I-4.triO-z regarding.
contractor represenmCian Is added to
include a motflfied' douse; replacing £ I-
4.1108-4.
(44) Subsection 1-4.U1TP7 regarding
fixed price options « added1, replacing;
S 1-4.1108-4 as. changed by FPR
Amendment 210. Note parttcutaETy. (her
optional spedaf contractual provision1
regarding (jlfl'BOntftumnCT of fottnf of
items during, act at f&e end; of a
contract period.
(45) Section 1-tOTl regarding,
additional clauses Is added:
(48"T Section. I-tIlI2 cegard&rft
guidanca is added; replacing J 1-4.1107-
19.
Cc>The changes, fir tnls reguTauan.
were developed concurrently wBn
substantfve changer (a existing
provisions, in FFMK Subpart 101-35^-
Management. Acquisition, and
Utilization of Aufamanc Data
Procesaing,fADPJ Resources. This.
Subpart 1-4.H is intended to he uaad m-
concert with Subpart 10I-35X.
psrticuTarly, of Subchapfer Fof th>
FPMR.
(d\ This regulation, cancels EPS
Temporary Regulation. 45 [4JFR4DOIS;
Sept 8^1978}; FPR Temp. Reg, 46LSupp.
2 (44 FR 5220K. Sept r.IOTJIt FPK Temp.
Reg. 4B. Supp. 3 P4TFR 8Z90B, Sept 23»
1980); and FPR Temp. Reg. 47~fcfaF&
41044, SepU 14, 19781 whidi an dalsfed
from the appendix at the end of 41 CFR
Chapter 1. This rcgnjafion. sopeEaedes-
the provfsiomi of FPR Temp. Reg, 4ff{44-
FR 22725, Ape. IT Tjffl3]\ rVH. Temp. Reg,
49, Siipp. I f45FR 13734. Mar. 3. 198PJ.
FPMR Temp. Reg. F-492 (44 FE6ZS1ST
OcL 31. 1379); and! EPMR.TempLBBa,r-
498 (45 FR812O2.ate.lflkIS8Qlwto.uie
regulatfon.
1. Tfca fable, of conCsnai fa-PBrfl-iis
changed by revising, Aatidff and
contents of Subpart 1-4V1X as> folio wsr
Subpart T-«t1-
fctOB
Automatic Oetoi Pfoceee400 EajifproenV
Software* MalnteoancekServloea>afid
Supplies.
Sec.
1-4.1100, Scope of suboart
1-4^100-1 Relationship tathft Federal
Property Management Regulations
(FPMR):
1-41108-2 HeIotioBaaip-(e>otfaeff
1-401091-3 Dwiatiorai
1-4.1101 Appllcabilitsi
1-4.1102 Deflnitiflna.
1-4.1102-1 Automatic datapraceising.
equipment
1-4.1102-2 Software
1-4.1102-3 Firmware.
oaulalSm
l-4.1102r&
1-4.1102-8)
1-4,1102-Z
1-4.1102-8. NbncompatitUra faola. source J
1-4.110Z-9 Nfajtlmum-practisabift
1-4.1102-10
1-4.1102-11 System/item Ufa.
1-4.1102- 1^ Functio&al *nn"^g*a*^niia
l-4.ii02rl7 Einiipment performance
spmifTuu Uu usv
1-4.HOM4-
1-4.110^*5-
1-4.1 iaz-te>
1-4J10B-W
1-4.1102-ia Frnfataiagpney.
t-4.1103 GanenlpolTcfes.
l—^DO^T CompetDfon.
1-4.1109-7 »snBiieunm8> anaryrtst.
1-4.1183^
1-4.1104 Pteousmant aumoriTf.
amalaa«» ggntag
1-44104-2 Software.
1-4.1104-1 Mamtenan
1-4.1104-t,
1-4.1104-5 Automatic data
1-4.1105 Reqnesrforprocurement action.
1-4.11081
1-4.110B>4.
1-4.11OB-Z GSAresponaibiliUBS w&eaGSA
l)HKiUi« ADPftans- fox anamer agency.
1-4.1107
ty. fg-dettgaHed
byGSA. ~
1-4U10* MafrrsyttamasqaMtttm
atacffo
1-4J109 H^
1-413109^1 RocuBBmeirr-related* dnvctfVea*
l-4.110»r2- CbmpeoHw basts-an*
1-4.1109-3. Betal
1-4.1109-4 [Reserved)
1-4.U09-B> SoalL
l-4.tteV8>
1-4.1109-7- Ufeerof
apedficatioits*
See.
1-4.1109-9- Handling; o£ late- bids; proposals.
modificatioaa. anolwithdiowala,
1-4.1UB-UI Use of functtonat specificaUonav
1-4.1109-11 Use. of other types, ol
specifications or purchase desenptions.
1-4.1109-12. Compalibility limited
Software- conversion1 stndier.
1-4.1109-14 Determination of eanveniair
cost*.
facton.
ts.
1-4.U08.-K
1-4.1109-18 Fumiahing ADP ftem*>and
lervices to conttaclors.
l-4.no»-ra PUrcftaw options for contractor
l-4.T10»-a*
requiremenla.
1-4.1109-Z1 ReBlnctiana on.tna use of
simulotioir in AOP'tyitenu procurement
1-4.1109-22 U«6ofbenchmarkB-iitft)wr
dollar OOP system* procurement.
1-4.1109-24
1-4.11O9-25)
1-4.^110-1 Limitation,
1-4.1110-2 CbntractbtrapBeuntafion. "
1-4.T115-J Rxeo? price optfons.
1-4.1111 Adtfltfonali clauses.
1-C.11TZ AssistBnovbyCSA.
Authority: Sectfnr 2DSfe)i 69 SteC 3SOi 4B>
2. The tfdo anrf rexfof Subpart T-tn
is revised to readaovfollawK
Subpart V*1
Cantracttngi(
AatomBtfel
Equlpmeirt Software^ I
scopvafi
This subpart setff farm noliicfas.and
procedure* which are to be employed' la
the-procuremant of afl' antomatfe 'data
processing equipment (ADPEJ,.
commercially available software, •
maintenance services,, and related
supplies by Pedaia! ageocies,(aea0Jaa
{1-4.1109-1), and by Government
contractors, aatdiraeted by agencies.
31-41100.4 RMeaenihfci tc>nie>Fsaeiet
Property iitafUQOinofit RVQutalfBt«i (FPMH^.
(a) Subchapter Fof this1 Btte ftt CFR
Chapter 101. hereafter refenred' to ay die
FPMR) pravidevpoOeiesv praeeduies;
anrf guideflnev pertaining' tv me-
managemeot of GerenmnnfvribV
automatic oafe? processing, fADPf
functions' fsee- parnoiRBiy' FPMR
Suhpart 101-35JJ. The- FPMR involveT
such matters as [1] Ae* security of AOF
systBmff, fZJ! irtfltation: of ADP
resonreee, (3} reuthTzatlorr of eqnipmenV
and supplier. (Hf aasietancB' to- Pederaf
agencies'. (SJ'Feueiaf data processing'
centers. (BftltoArJP'anfacanairand1
103
-------
1198 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday, January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
consolidation program. (7) ADP records
management, and (8) implementation of
Federal information processing
standards publications (FIPS PUBS] and
Federal telecommunications standards
(FED-STD).
(b) The provisions of FPMR Part 101-
37 are applicable to telecommunications
when associated with ADP.
(c) When telecommunications are
involved, regardless of the authority to
procure ADPE as indicated in § 1-
4.1104-1. agencies are required to submit
the documentation prescribed, in FPMR
Part 101-37.
(d) FPMR Subpart 101-17 concerns the
information that must be submitted to .
GSA relative to space requirements for
ADPE.
§1-4.1100-2 FMadonahlp to other
procurement Authority*
fa) Under Section 111 of the Federal
Property and Administrative. Services
Actof 1949.79 Stat. 1127. as amended
(40 U.S.C. 759). the Administrator of
General Services has authority to
coordinate and provide for the purchase,
tease, and maintenance of ADP
equipment by Federal agencies as well
as other matters .relating to the
management, acquisition, and utilization
of ADP. The exercise of this
procurement authority shall be
accomplished as specified in this
subpart
(b) Section lll(g) of the Property Act
(40.U.S.C. 759. Pub. 1^89-306) provides
that ^.Administrator's authority is
subject to fiscal and policy control of the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). When an agency- submits
matters to the OMB for resolution (see
FPMR § 101-36.001) and the matters
relate to the procurement and
contracting for ADP, copies shall be
furnished to GSA as provided in FPMR.
5 101-36.001.
§1-4.1100-3 Deviation*
To maintain.uniformity to the greatest'
extent feasible, deviations (as the term
is described in § 1-1.009-1) from this
subpart shall be kept to a minimum and
controlled as follows:
(a) The head of each agency
exercising delegated procurement
authority uwier this subpart shall
prescribe a formal agency procedure for
the control of requests for deviations
from this subpart A copy of this
procedure shall be provided to the
General Services Administration (CPE).
Washington/DC 20465.
(b) Individual deviations may be
authorized only by the Administrator of
General Services or the officers
designated by the Administrator for this,
purpose. Class deviations may be
authonzed only by the Administrator. In
each instance, the request shall disclose
the nature of the deviation and the
reasons therefor. Requests for
deviations shall be forwarded to the
General Services Administration (CPS).
Washington. DC 20405.
(c) Except as otherwise authorized.
when any deviation in a contract form
provision is authorized, physical change
may not be made in the printed form but
shall be made by appropriate provision
in the schedule, specifications, or
continuation sheet, as provided in
agency procedures.
§1-4.1101 Applicability.
(a) Federal agencies. The policies and
procedures set forth-in this subpart
apply to the procurement of ADPE,
commercially available software,
maintenance services, and related
supplies by Federal agencies regardless
of use or application including
Government-acquired ADPE. software.
or related supplies provided to
qpntractors.
(^Government contractors, (1)
Except as set forth in paragraph (b)(2) of
this section, agencies shall require their
contractors to apply the policies and
procedures set forth" in this subpart to
the procurement of ADPE, commercially
available software, maintenance
services, and related supplies when the
very subject matter of the contract(s) is
for the-performance of commercial ADP
services foe a Federal agency (see FPMR
i 101-35.202-8 and {l-tllOQ-l'fl) and
(i) The Government requires the
contractor to purchase the ADPE or
software for the account of the
Government: or
(ii) The Government requires the
contractor to pass title to the ADPE or
software to the Government; or
(iii) The Government pays the full.
lease costs of the ADPE OF software
under a cost-reimbursement contract.
(2)-When the very subjec* matter of a
contract is for something other than the
procurement of ADP items or services.'
and commercially available ADPE is
incorporated into the non-ADP system.
or commercial ADP services are used in
contract performance, the acquisition
and management pf the non-ADP system
shall be in accordance with other'
.applicable regulations rather than, this
subpart (but see S 1-4.110B-1B).
§1-4.1102 Definitions.
The terms used in this subpart shall
have the meanings set forth in-this
section.
1-4.1 102-1 Automatic data processing
"Automatic data processing
equipment" (ADPE) means 'general
purpose, commercially available, mass-
produced automatic data processing
devices: i.e., components and the
equipment systems configurated from
them together with commercially
available software packages that are
provided and are not priced separately,
and all documentation and. manuals
relating thereto, regardless of use. size,
capacity, or price, that are designed to
be applied to the solution or processing
of a variety of problems or applications
and are not specially designed, as
opposed to configured, for any specific
application.
(a) Included are:
(1) Digital, analog, or hybrid
computers;
(2) Auxiliary or accessorial
equipment, such as plotters, tape
cleaners, tape testers, data conversion
equipment, source data automation
• recording.equipment (optical character
recognition devices, paper tape
typewriters, magnetic tape, card, or
cartridge typewriters, word processing
equipment, computer input/output .
microfilm and other data acquisition .
devices), or computer performance
evaluation equipment etc, designed for
use with digital, analog, or hybrid
computer equipment, either cable
connected, wire connected, or stand
alone, and whether selected or acquired
with a computer or separately;
(3) Punched card accounting machines
JPCAM) that can be used in conjunction
with or independently of digital, analog,
or hybrid computers: and
(4) Data transmission or
communications equipment, including.
front-end processors, terminals, sensors,
and other similar devices, designed
primarily for use with a configuration of
ADPE.
(b) Excluded are:
(1) ADPE systems and components
specially designed (as opposed to
.configured) and produced to perforava
•specific set or series of computational.
• data manipulation, or control functions
1 When the iiibfBct matter of • requirement (or a
uverable portion thereof) ii the supplying of ADP
•emcee or ADP related service* lo a Federal
agency. see Subpart 1-4.12 (Rmarvad al publication
dale).
"The acquiaillon of Joint Committee on Printing
(JCP) controlled equipment in FSC Croup 70
dedicated to printing processes and utilizing
computer technology, Including electronic printing
systems, integrated printing system*, and photo-
composition equipment, continues lo be subject lo
the provisions of title 44. U S Code, and the |CP
Government Printing and Binding Regulation! ai.
well aa lo this regulation. * '
104
-------
Federal Rttgiater / VoL 4ft. No. 2. / Monday, [anuary 5. T98T / Rules and Regulations 1199
to permit the processing of only one
problem: and
(2) Commercially available ADPEtlrat
is modified to meet Government
specifications at the time of production
to the extent that:
(i) It no fonger has a commerciar
market or
(iiT tt cannot be used* to process" a
variety of problem* or applications: or
(iiij n can be used only as- an integral'
part of a non-ADP system.
§1-4.1102-2 Sottnatamm.
(a) "Software" means computer
programs, procedures, rules. 01 routines
specifically designed to make me of and
extend the capabilities of ADPE amf
includes operating systems-. assenrUen;
compilers, interpreters; data base"
management systems', utility programs;
sort-merge programs; maintenanc8>-
diagnostic pfugpunsv ami applications1'
programs'. TBe. fiernr
operating syubuiui suftwara,
independent subnntiiKB. lefaftiu gmupa
of routines; sets OT systems of programs,
Ftaa-t
§ 1-4.1102-3], and computer data bases
whether Goven-jmenf-wwraed or
(b) ''Commerci---!*/a-raflabtr
i software tint is
ava
the commercial; market fan • oracera
representing ftseff to bowe* owaoabqi
Sblrwaw that i»mcn»oaiaa part of ther
AW system but that mmpacrttbp
priced, is incradfed
form acceptabw ta f rmnpuh-g'. oBBigan>
operation or opaalluM uwciasaBjr to
process re*-fua-Brae-*a» such as ]
inventory control or
ngin^ying
teBtandl
software, max oe eitnermachuie-
dependenC ur. uiakfiiiH-iiiui!|JBiiiIeii1t and
may he guiiei'uf-uutpuse fir naturcorbe*
designed fa satisfy the remoreinentftof a*
specialuccu orocese~ or 9 jjaiitUiuia****UDair.
(d) "Computer data bmJ'ammra
stored* cofijEctrbn or dirts in.vrbnn'
capable of being ynjceiuiuu and*
operated1 OR or by/ a* compnfec r.eu the*
elements or storco? datft usen Dy* a?
computer in responding' or a- computer
(erCa-my software
and printouts that (1) doom-rents'the-
design as detaik of cnmpHlPr solLwant
(2) explaina tha sapabdfties of the
software. [3} pi-oxides data for testihg-
the software^ or [41 provides operating
instructions.
(fl "Software conversion1" means the
transformation, witSouffinit-tionar
change, of cuiHjjutw piugMiuis or data*
elements to penmT Uicu use oir a*
replacement or cnan-jecf ADP equipment
or teleprocessing* service* system.
(g). "Software- redesign*" means any
change to software1 tftat anwvvf at
change in the functional specnTcatibm
for that software-
(h) "Reprogramming^ meana any -
change to software that deviates from
the design specffica-tfnn-fbrtfrat
software uut pieserves tne nnctRRiar
fmnuiTpmvnta nFA"p mor*
(T) "Reeoduig"* means a* nranual
change- to software en a> liae>-for-Jftw
basis that preserves both the fmitrtigngt
requirements and software. ds-si---!»
speoffeafif-ins;
(j) "Aufoma-h
changea-to aoftw-a* i
procasae*d mcodm*g i
theftmcttoMaii
i&atiiDnstB tne
V AIU1 1 1 UHKI
hardwarerorien-tf-ri
any AD?
basic. IbgielB-y«Ia£tnaci-*mnutec that ia
used foe machine, coiit£oJk
mathematical functfons, appEcaMomi
programs, engineering analysis
firmware that itr furnished with ADPE*'
coBBBaRially available. prop.ri£taiy
filBLWaze, thaLift ng«inir«rf.an'mirntnty
from. ADFEL andaA vendoz
HnniTnan'ntfnri. antJ manna Fa.
thereto.
i 1-4.1109-*.
' maaaa. those
examination, testing., repair, or part
r*HpucP^pgp> nmcuOBv pcnwi^niB'ff 10* i AL
Reduc6 t&tf
in A ^ tij^-^ntjfT n
to its properoperaftey s being1 validated
during' vtf pi umivuienf uiucess'.
(b) "Ihternaf emtntrtitjn'" mnuiis a*
technique* used, rbr HflmJivtussiny
• performance1 valldatiorr irr which the*
teleprocessing wurkfoarf is* fiid uifaeexr
from software* ruiuiiug1 iiilnuur tv the*
SUT, either iit the* centraf proeessmg*
unit, the LUBuuuiuLvl'Riiis' Irunl1 e*n*n on
when* the* ai LRilfeiJiiiff aup-jurdi if. some1
other yi'Oi'caDur' cuiingureu as* purf or tne*
SB7.
[c)° "Renmte* termmar ernvni'liuii'"
means a tecnnique for tefeprotsessuig'
perfonnance validation* in whivfl' ifie
driver and monitor couipuiieub* are
implemented ertemaf to* amf
independenf of the SGT.
fd] "DriTer1" nreHir"r a remote* teiiuriitH1
emulation' uuiii|juiieiiti extermf to* tfie
SUT, which* introduces specified
workload demands* to the ADP system-
being. teshiij1.
(ef "Muiuhji1"1 meuiiif at leuuittp
Bennhial enralktfon componant',
to the SUT. which records- dafff
descripnVva. e£ m*
(fj "Samnlet
means a sp
* fa. **rmititr may nwi may
not ha a»v fnt -»j-Qli part nf an. KTB!],.
that tha Guvt-n
req-mr
tuift1 re
i IB sei
forth in* tfie' form* of functional
specincafions; ex]urpmBnt perfonnanca*
specifTcatToiiB; a ram&imitunrt&ereof;
soffware and equipment1 pfug-tb-pfug;
descriptfons", orbruiidnaineorexuifll
descriptions, that aflbwy ina-xJanmr
practicable aoiafatitiaa. and; is. de>*raid oi
angry hlBB. tOWBJld oithcrtB
fir 8, an«M-ifl
}1-4.1TD2<-«
rpetttfre fscfa
requirement-" moans7 tttet t&e
Govenuiieiit's'Teniiuvuitnif ia sef fbrtrr hi
the. fbrnt ofTnecBSBary sfjeuflTuuflum that
are so restrictive that* there is only one "
known supplier capable, of ransfyiinj the
Government's requirement or the
procurement is based* on. spBofic make
andlmodeE sperflTralumy/p-archase;
existence of adequate price competittmT
. aa deflnadi ia i 11-1807-1^)^ (y-a-; ifi
BppllC&blflt Pfl^iyn^i^ Ar/-ini-ai|t|q|^
RegulatioA fDAR) l-OJ7J(a).J.
y 1*^^ T^s***— v Mudtnum p^adlcaole*
"Mbximunr practtca hi? competition
means a np-jotjErted1 procuiemenf action
105
-------
1200 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday, January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
when proposals are solicited from the
maximum number of qualified sources,
including small business concerns.
consistent with the nature of and
requirements for the supplies or services
to be procured, to the end that the
procurement will be made to the best
advantage of the Government price and
other factors considered. This requires a
procurement strategy, suitable to the .
circumstances, in which the statement of
the user's requirement is set forth in the
least restrictive terms possible without
compromising-economy or efficiency. It
is designed to elicit from responsible
Finns capable of satisfying the needs, a
number of favorable offers
commensurate with the value of the
procurement It is calculated to satisfy
the user's needs at the lowest overall
cost to the Government price and other
factors considered (see § 1-4.1102-10).
The quantifiable cost of conducting the
procurement and other administrative
costs directly related to the procurement
process are included.
§1-4.1102-10 Lowest overall coat
"Lowest overall cost" means the least
expenditure of funds over the system/
item life, price and other factors
considered. Lowest overall costs shall
include purchase price, lease orrental
cost or services cost of the contract
actions involved, other factors, and
other identifiable and quantifiable costs
that are directly related fo the .
acquisition and use of the system/item;
e.g., personnel, maintenance and.
operation. site preparation, energy
consumption, installation, conversion.
system start-up,, contractor support and
the present value discount factor (see
also FPMR § 101-35.210).
§1-4.1102-11 System/Item life. -
"System/item life" means a forecast
or projection of the period of time that
begins with the installation of the
system/item and ends when the
Government's need for that system/item
has terminated. System/item life is
established by the initial acquiring-
agency on the basis of its requirement
and predicted reuse (see § 101-35.208).
System/item life is not necessarily
synonymous with technological life
(utility before becoming obsolete).
physical life (utility before physically
wearing out), or application life (utility
in a given function}.
§1-4.1102-12 Functional speclflcatlone.
"Functional specifications'* means the
delineation of the program objectives
based on.mission,needs in a form that
the ADP system is intended to
accomplish and the data processing
requirements underlying that
accomplishment. The latter includes a
description of the data output and its
intended uses, the data input the data
files and record content, the volumes of
data, the processing frequencies, timing.
and such other facts as may be
necessary to provide for a full'
description of the ADP mission need to
be satisfied.
§1-4.1102-13. Equipment performance
-_ — tttttmnttnmtm
specific noons*
"Equipment performance
specifications" means a statement of
minimum user output requirements such
as the amount of data that needs to be
stored or processed within a given time,
the number of lines of print that must be
done over a given time, and the
operation reliability,supplemented to
the extent necessary with those
hardware factom devoid of as much-
vendor orientation as possible, such as
cycle-time, computing speed, tape read
or write speed, printer speed, size of
memory, expansibility (modularity), etc.,
and the related software which are a
measure of the* operating capability of
equipment and which, when applied to
the functional specifications, provide a
quantitative measure of the operating
time and capacity required to process
the applications involved on that
equipment
§1-4.1102-14 Agency procurement
"Agency procurement request" (APR)
means a request by ajrederal agency for
GSA~to procure ADPE, commercially
available software, or maintenance
services or .for GSA to delegate the
^authority to procure these1 items.
§1-4.1102-15 Mandatory requirement*.
"Mandatory requirements" means
those contractual conditions and
technical specifications that are
established by* the Government as being
essential to meet the Government's
needs. When set forth in a solicitation.
the mandatory requirements must be
met for the bid (offer) t6 be ccr.ddered
responsive (acceptable).
§1-4.11016 Evaluate* option* features.
"Evaluated optional features" means
those technical requirements that are-
established by the Government but that
does-not have to be bid (offered) to be
responsive (acceptable) to the specific
solicitation. When set forth in a
solicitation, all evaluated'optional
features must reflect the relative value
of each feature to the Government Each
evaluated optional feature may be
offered at the discretion of the offerer.
§ 1-4.1102-17- Selection plan.
"Selection plan" means criteria and
systematic procedures established to
enable the Government to measure the
proposal of an offeror/bidder against
the requirements of the Government as
set forth in the solicitation document
These criteria shall be based on the
Government's requirements and shall
not be equipment- or vendor-oriented.
except where .a brand name or equal
specification or specific make or model
description is needed to express the
requirement adequately.
§1-4.1102-18 Federal agency.
"Federal agency" means (a) any
executive agency (executive department
or independent establishment in the
executive branch including any wholly.
owned Government corporation) or (b)
any establishment in the legislative or
judicial branch of the Government
(except the Senate, the House of
Representatives, and the Architect of
the Capitol and any activities under the
Architect's direction] (see 40 U.S.C. 472).
§1-4.1103 General polteiea.
§1-4.1103-1 Competition.
Full and open competition is\a basic
procurement objective of the
Government. The maximum practicable
competition, among offerers who are
capable of meeting the user's needs will
ensure that the Government's ADP
needs an satisfied at the lowest overall
coat, price and other factors considered,
over the system/item life. This extends
to actions necessary to foster
competitive conditions for subsequent
procurements. To meet fully the lowest
overall cost objective, it is essential that •
proper management and planning
actions be accomplished before the
acquisition becomes imminent (see
FPMR S 101-37.206).
§1-4.1103-2 Requlr
•lysta
The acquisition of an initial ADP
capability or the augmentation or
replacement of an existing capability
shall be preceded by a comprehensive
requirements analysis that is
commensurate with the scope and
complexity of the program objectives
and mission needs. The operational and
economic feasibility of all alternative
solutions, including use of non-ADP
resources, sharing..use of commercial
ADP services, and reutiUzation of
excess Government-owned or leased
equipment shall be considered (see
FPMR § 101-35.207).
§1-4.1103-3 Urgent requlrementa.
The existence of a public exigency,
i.e.. the Government will suffer serious
injury, financial or otherwise, if the
106
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday, January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1201
equipment or services are not available
by a specific date, shall not relieve the
agency from the responsibility for
obtaining maximum practicable
competition (see § 1-3.202 (or. if
applicable DAR 3-202)).
§1-4.1103-4 Mifor system acquisitions.
Major ADP systems to be acquired in
accordance with the provisions of OMB
Circular A-109 and agency
implementing directives are subject to
(his subpart (see 51-4.1108).
§1-4.1103-5 Small burtnen and labor
surplus eres concerns.
ADPE, software, maintenance
services, and related supplies may be
set aside for award to small business or
labor surplus area concerns in
accordance witlrthe provisions of
Subparts 1-1.7 and 1-1.8 and
implementing agency policies and
procedures (or. if applicable. DAR Parts
1-7 and 1-8).
§1-4.1104 Procurement euthorny.
(a) To allow forthe-orderly
implementation of a program&r the
economic and efficient procurement of
ADPE; commercially available software,
maintenance services, and related
supplies, agencies are authorised fa
procure these-items in accordance with
the provisions of this 31-4,1104
provided that requirements are not
*T?ffntffHTfto ID oroftf* to ^ucuewcox toff
established blanket delegation
thresholds, or whan a specific
delegation or procurement authority has
been provided in accordance with the
provision* of I § 1-4.1103 and 1-4J108.
However, the applicable provisions of
FPMR Subdwpter F shall b» complied
with before initfBong e procurement
action. .
(b) The exercise of procurement
authority shall be acconinlished as
specified in 41-4.1109.
(c) Two copies of the solicitation
tbifiiirumt ^|/fJfif or IFB, as applicable)
and any subsequent amanHnumt thereto
that changes the specifications,
evaluation criteria, or installation date
shall be forwarded to the General -
Services Administration (GPS),
Washington. DC 20405. aa soon as
available, but shall not arrive later than
8 workdays before the proposed date of
issuance to industry. GSAwiD notify the
agency of the data of receipt of the
received. However, if timely issuance of..
the solicitation is critical to agency
mission accampttahment. copies of the
solicitation document may be forwarded
to GSA concurrently with issuance to
Industry, provided that the-RFPIs based
on the GSA Solicitation Document for
ADP Equipment Systems,1 whether in
the GSA or Defense Acquisition
Regulation (DAR) format, or the
specifications have been received by-
industry in accordance with § 1-4.1109-
8. Amendments to all solicitations that
are clearly administrative in nature or
are for clarification purposes need not
be forwarded to GSA until the dates the
amendments are sent to industry.
(d) One copy of the contract and
subsequent modifications thereto shall
be forwarded to GSA when they are
issued
51-4.1104-1 Auto
Except as indicated in 11-4.1104-5
regarding potential use of the ADP Fund,
FPMR Subpart 101-3&2 with respect to
sharing, and FPMR Sobpart 101-383
with respect to the use of excess ADPE,
agencies may'procure ADPE without
prior approval of GSA, unless
procurement authority has been
specifically withdrawn, whea either
paragraph-(a). (b). or (c) of this 51-
4.1104-1 .applies.
(a) The procurement is-to be made by
placing a purchaae/deh'very order
against an applicable GSA
requirements-type contract
[b) Tie, procurement is to be made by
placing a purchase/delivery order
ngntnat a.GSA "*h*fhllft COBtnct
provided that the following, three-
conditions are met
(1) The order is within the ""»»^if»n"«
order limitation (MOL) of the applicable.
contract;
(2) The total purchase price of the.
.ltem(a) co vend by the order does not
exceed $300,0001'and
• (3) The requirements set forth in Jl-
4.1109-8 on the use of GSA schedule
contracts are met
(c) The procurement is to be made by
normal solicitation.procedures and'
value * of the procurement does not
exceed:
(1) $500.000 purchase price or * $12.500
basic monthly rental charges T for
competitive procurements; or
(2) $50.000 purchase price or • $1.500
basic monthly rental charges ' for either
sola source or specific make and model
Tht GSA SoOdtKVai Document for ADP
2MOS.
•Etna UMB> ib»JUM« <• ^
Ituad. the porefcua ptioa ih*U t» uad to
drtontao tf 1h» t|
•ttendul ntntnuiee coiU.
§1-4.1104-2 Software.
Except for software available through
the Federal Software Exchange Center
(FSEC) covered by FPMR Subpart 101-
38.16. agencies may procure
commercially available software
without prior approval of GSA when
either paragraph (a), (b], (c). or (d) of
this § 1-4.1104-2 applies.
(a) The. procurement is to be made by
placing a purchase/deli very order
against an applicable GSA
requirements-type contract
(b) The procurement is to be made-by
placing a purchase/deli very order under
the terms and conditions of an
applicable GSA schedule contracL(see
$ 1-4.1109-6).
(c) The procurement is to be made by
normal solicitation procedures and total
value of the procurement, excluding
maintenance, for the specific software
package(s) does not exceed:
(1) $100,000 for competitive
procurement; or
(2) $50.000 for sole source
procuremenla.
(d) The software is provided with and
is not separately priced from the ADPE,
91-4.1104-3 Maintenance sorvlcee.
Agencies may procure mainte
services without prior approval of GSA
when either paragraph (a) or (b) of this
51-4.1104-3 applies.
(a) The procurement ia to be made by
placing a purchase/delivery order tinder
the tanns nn^ conditions of an
applicable GSA schedule contract (see
S1-4J109-8).
(b] The procurement is to be made by
normal solicitation procedures nTH *h«
value of the matntan^n^a charges do not-
exceed $200.000 annually for a
competitive procurement of $50.000
annually for a sole source procurement.
51-4.lt04-4 ReMedeuppflee.
Agencies may procure related
supplies without prior approval of GSA
when specific purchase programs
established by GSA have been
considered and determined to. be
inapplicable (see S 1-4,1109-17).
91-4.1104-5 Ante
•He
sing
i PI
When a lease/purchase evaluation
indicates that it would be to the best
interest of die Government to purchase
rather than lease ADPE or commercially
available-software and funds are not
readily available within the agency: e.g,
when- then is insufficient time to secure
the necessary funds under-normal '
budgetary procedures or to reprogram
lor the required funds, the matter shall
b'e forwarded to GSA in the manner
prescribed in FPMR {101-35.211. When
107
-------
1202
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
approved by GSA. the AOP fund may be
used by agencies to obtain maintenance
services for ADP leased from CSA
through the AOP fund.
§ 1-4.1105 Request for procurement
action.
If an agency determines that the
conditions of the contemplated
procurement are not covered by the
provisions of § 1-4.1104. or if the
conditions of the contemplated
procurement change during the
procurement process in such manner as
to remove it from those provisions, four
copies of the agency procurement
request (APR) and other applicable
documents shall be forwarded to the
General Services Administration (CPS),
Washington. DC 20405. The APR shall
contain the name and telephone number
of an individual within the agency who
shall act as the point of contact with
GSA. The APR shall include, as
applicable:
(a) A copy of the proposed solicitation
document, if available.- If the solicitation
document is not available-, the functional
specifications or the ADPE configuration
that is to be acquired shall be'induded.'
Unless a functional specification is
provided, the description should reflect
the estimated number of central
processing units, storage devices.and~
controllers, terminals, other peripheral
devices, and communications devices.
(b) A statement providing the
estimated budgeted value of the
procurement in the agency's request to.
OMB. whether these funds wen
implicitly or explicitly described, and
the fiscal year of the budget request.
(c) Estimated system or item life (see
§ 1-4.1102-11) and estimated system life
cost. .
(d) Location (city and state) of the '
data processing facilities involved.'
(ej Fiscal quarter during which, the
solicitation is expected to be released to
industry for procurement action.
(f) Unique software, maintenance, and
support requirements, if any.
(g) A statement or other evidence that
indicates that a performance evaluation
has been made forthe currently
installed ADP system(s). when
applicable, to ensure that the proposed
procurement represents the lowest
overall cost alternative for meeting the
agency's data processing need (see
FPMR Subpart 101-36.14).
(h) Evidence that sffe construction/
modification is or is not-inquired (see
FPMR 5 101-17.101-6). One of the
following statements-shall be used for
this purpose;
(1) The acquisition'of this equipment
will not require site construction on,
modification by GSA: or
(2) The acquisition of this equipment
will require site (construction)
(modification) by GSA which must be
completed by (date) and notification and
information, as applicable, (has been)
(will be) submitted to GSA on (date).
(i) A statement that the need to
acquire ADPE or ADP systems has-been
documented as required by FPMR § 101-
35.207.
(j) A statement that, as FPMR'
Subparts 101-38.2 and 101-36.3 require..
available ADP resources have been
screened and no ADP resources are
available to satisfy the user's
requirements.
(k) A justification, if applicable, to
support a contemplated noncompetitive
(sole source) procurement (including use
of specific make and model purchase
description). Specifically, this
justification must address:
(1) The intended use or application of
the equipment;
(2) The critical installation schedule(s)
or unique features and/or mandatory
requirements, dictated by the intended
use, that limit the acquisition to a single
source of supply or a specific make and'
model. (The overriding necessity of
these competition-limiting requirements
shall be clearly identified):
(3) The-fact that no other known or -•
probable source of supply exists for the-
required equipment, if a noncompetitive
(sole source) procurement is
contemplated. (The justification also
shall elaborate on the steps taken which
led to this conclusion.);
(4) The existence of patent copyright.
or other limitations; and
(5) The practical factors which
preclude the development of
specifications and/or the requirement
for competition (see 5 1-4.1102-7).
(1) Documentation; when
telecommunications are involved (see
§ l-4.1ltXM(c)).
(m) One of the following statements
regarding-compliance with the Privacy
Act of 1974:
(1) Equipment or services identified by
this request will not be-used to operate a,
system of records or individuals to
accomplish an agency function.
(2) Equipment or services identified by
this request will be used to operate a
system of records on individuals to
accomplish an agency, function. All
applicable provisions of the Privacy Act
have been compjied with, including
submitting a report of new systems to
Congress and OMB on (date).
(n) A brief description of the primary
agency program(s) that the-equipment or
services will support.
(o) Computer security requirements.
where applicable, as certified by the
responsible agency official (see FPMR
Subpart 101-35.3).
(p) Software conversion study where
applicable (see § 1-4.1109-13).
(q) Findings to support the use of
compatibility limited requirements
where applicable (see § 1-4.1109-12).
§ 1-4.1106 GSA action on procurement
requests.
(a) After review of an APR and the
documentation submitted under § 1-
4.1105 and subject to the right of the
agency to determine its individual
software, maintenance, and ADPE
requirements, including the development
of specifications for and the selection of
the types and configurations of
equipment needed, the Commissioner.
Automated Data and
Telecommunications Service, will:
(1) Delegate to the agency the
authority to conduct the procurement; or
(2) Delegate to the agency the
authority to conduct the procurement
and provide for participation in the
procurement with the agency to the "
extent considered necessary under the
circumstances; or
• (3) Provide for the procurement by
GSA or otherwise obtain the-
requirement on behalf of the agency'/
(b) Action will be taken by GSA
within 20 workdays after receipt of full
information from an agency involving a
request for procurement (APR) or
supplemental APR data as provided in
5 1-4.1105. Upon expiraflba of this 20- -
workday period plus 5 calendar days for
mail lag. the agency concerned may
proceed with the procurement as if a
delegation of authority had. in fact been
granted. This 20-workday period is
subject to written-modification by GSA
in the event that after review, it is found
that the APR does not contain the full
information required. To establish a
common understanding of the 20-
workday period. GSA will provide
written verification*within this period to
the agency concerned that identifies the
date of receipt of an APR or
supplemental APR data.
(c) In the event that unusual
circumstances •surrounding the
procurement dictate" that a longer period
of time is required for GSA to complete
its appraisal. GSA will provide written
verification within the 20-workday
period. Under these circumstances the
automatic delegation rule as set forth in
paragraph (b) of this section shall not -
apply.
$1-4.1106-1 Agency responsibiUtles when
QSA procure* AOP Item* for that agency.
When GSA procures ADP items for
another agency, the procurement is a •
joint endeavor of both the requiring
108
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46> No. 2 / Monday, January S. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1203
agency and GSA. To preclude an
overlap of functions, the responsibilities
of each participant in the procurement
are clearly delineated with the requiring
agency's functions listed in this § I-
4.1100-1. (The functions of GSA are
listed in § 1-4.1106-2.) The requiring-
agency shall:
(a) Submit to GSA the documentation
required by & 1-4.1105. The
documentation shall include the
agency's requirements, the system/item
life, the technical specification, if
applicable, and the justification to
support negotiated procurement:
(b) Prepare the technical portion of
the solicitation document and define
any unique requirements:
(cj Provide necessary technical
personnel (and contracting personnel if
the agency desires) as members of the -
contract negotiating team;
(d) Prepare the selection plan and
submit it to the GSA contracting officer
before issuing the solicitation document;
(e) Evaluate proposals from a
technical point of view and arrange for
offerers' oral presentations, when
appropriate;
(f) Provide copies of correspondence
to the GSA contracting officer when the
agency is authorized to communicate
directly with offeron under the
provisions of 5 1-4J10&-2;
(g) Determine the technical capability
of the items offeced to meet the requiring
agency's requirements; technical
, nn<4 Systems OT items l'ft»
(]) Assist the GSA contracting officer
in debriefing offerers when debrieGngs
are requested by offerers;
(k) Place the delivery order, if
applicable;
(1) Accomplish any other task not
included above which will further the
joint procurement objective or expedite
completion of the procurement action at
the agency's discretion and with GSA
concurrence; .and
(m) Administer the contract in
accordance with the terms and
conditions tEereof.
§1-4.1108-2 GSAreaao
GSA procures AOP Kama for another
Itttawhen
This responsibility shall include the
identification of those proposals that are
technically acceptable and those
proposals .that an not technically
acceptable/responsive. The- results shall
be transmitted to the GSA contracting
officer to enable the contracting officer
to take appropriate action with the
offeron:
(h) Select the lowest overall coat
iteinfa} ""^ transmit *h*« information ~
with the necessary supporting
documentation to the GSA contracting '
officer. If » conclusive judgment cannot
be made on the basis of lowest overall
cost* fl nitfttfittii tttMi Qct6nmfi&tfQ& to
this effect shall be prepared before any
other factor is used as a basis- for
selection:
(i) Provide the following
administrative information to the GSA
contracting officer wrth the data
required in paragraph tji) of this section:
MI Finance «fat» (° ff , paying office
and fund citation);
(2) Contract «»t««»iKiiK<« lurt md
addresses; and
' (T) Irinnnty nf nimipmrl rnntmrifm
officer within the requiring agency;
When conducting the procurement of
ADP items for another agency in
conjunction with the requiring agency's
• responsibilities in § 1-4.1106-1. above.
GSA shall:"
(a) Appoint the GSA contracting
officer
(b) Form the negotiating team which
will beheaded by the GSA contracting
officer
(c) Prepare and issue the solicitation
document and all amendments, thereto
after concurrence of the requiring
agency (the technical material shall be
supplied in final form by. the requiring
agency):
(d) Prepare the procurement plan
(which will be coordinated with the
requiring agency)\ the findings and
determination* and any CT"tM»«tuji
material needed for the selection plan;
(e) Act as the point of contact
between offeron and the Government
In thia respect, t^"> GSA contracting
officer wULpcovide the requiring agency
designated point of contact with a copy
of aU correspondence between the
offeron and the Government;-
Correspondence going to offeron wifi be
coordinated with'the requiring agency.
When appropriate, the GSA contracting
officer may authorize direct -
communication between the offeron
and the requiring agency on purely
technical matten. hi these instances, the
requiring agency shall" provide a copy of
the correspondence to the GSA
contractinyofficen
(f) Receive proposals from the
offeron;
(g) Provide copies of aft proposals)
received from the offeron: to the
aim
"mmrmy «H^™'J'«
(h) Review att often from a
contractual point of view:
(i) Provide personnel to be present ar
oe^Dona^ranoiist to detu^ame the
technical capability/ at the **»•» offend;
(U Notify the offerarfs) concerned
when a proposal is deternnned to he ~
unacceptable:
(k) Conduct negotiations with all
offerors whose proposals are within the
competitive range, price and other
factors considered [see § 1-3.805-1);
(1) Notify the offeron of the date and
time that negotiations are to be
terminated:
(m) Provide the requiring agency
designated point of contact with both a
report which
-------
1204
Federal Register / Vol. 46.- No. 2 / Monday. January- 5, 1&81 / Rules and Regulations
applicable data required in the agency
procurement request (APR) as required
by § 1-4.1105 or the GSA Form 2068.
Request for ADP Service. In addition.
the request should include:
(i) A copy of the mission need
statement, approved in accordance with
applicable directives (Key Decision 1—
Approval of Mission Need Statement):
fii] The name, address, and telephone
number of the designated program
manager together with the approved
charter outlining the manager's
responsibilities, authority, and
accountability, and
(iii) A copy of the system acquisition
strategy and plan, approved by the
program manager.'
(b) Responsibilities of GSA.
(1) Before the contracting phase of a
major system acquisition, GSA will:
[\] Provide advice and assistance to
the requiring agency, as requested, in its
mission analysis efforts to the maximum
practicable extent.
(ii) Participate, in an advisory role to
the agency program manager, in the
development of the system acquisition
strategy and plan, upon request;
(2) Based on the major system
procurement request, GSA will:
(i) Delegate authority to the agency to
conduct the procurement;
(ii) Delegate-authority to the agency .to
conduct the procurement action- subject
la GSA-partiripation to the extent
specified in the delegation: or
(iii) Conduct the procurement on
beKalf of the agency.
(c) Procurement by the requiring
agency. When the agency acts under a
delegation of procurement authority, the
agency shall conduct the procurement in
compliance with applicable procurement
policies, regulations, and, in particular,
the specific terms of the delegation for
the major system acquisition. v
(d) Procurement by GSA.
(I) When GSA elects to conduct the
procurement, the procurement is a joint
endeavor. Agency responsibilities shall
be as sel forth in { l-4.1106-¥. as - '
modified and supplemented in this { 1~
4.11Q8(d).
(i) The necessary personnel for
evaluation of the concept designs and
demonstration contracts and for the-
selectknraf alternatives for further.
consideration shall be provided.
(ii) Copies of agency head approvals
(Key Decisions) shall be provided.
(2) When conducting the procurement
GSA'a responsibilities will be as set
forth in 91-4.1108-2.
§1-4.1109 Procurement actions.
The procurement of ADPE.
commercially available software,
maintenance services, and related
supplies shall be accomplished in
accordance with the policies and
procedures set forth in this j 1-4.1109.
§1-4.1109-1 Procurament-reiatetf
Procurement actions shall comply
with the following: ~
(a) Direction by the President and
fiscal and policy control exercised by
the Office of Management and Budget
(b) The Federal Property Management
Regulations (41 CFR Chapter 101],
particularly Subchapter F;
(c] Federal information processing
standards (FIPS), Federal
telecommunications standards (FED-
STD), and joint standards JFIPS/FED-
STD):
(d) Except as otherwise provided by
this Subpart 1-4.11, applicable
procurement regulations (e.g., the
Federal Procurement Regulations (41
CFR Chapter 1], agency regulations
implementing and supplementing the
FPR, (or. if applicable, die Defense
Acquisition Regulation)); and
(e) GSA directives and delegations.
$1-4.1109-2 Competttiva bails and
documentation.
All purchases and contracts shall be
made on a competitive basis to the
maximum practicable extent. If at any
time during a competitive procurement
only one vendor remains in the
competition or if efforts to obtain
competition fail, the procurement files
shall be documented before, contract
award to reflect this condition and the
reasons therefor. -
§1-4.1109-3. Publicizing pr
'Since (he acquisition rirategyand plu «riU-
bflcoino tra blusprini for tb^pncmnnit II
be developed ID eoordlnaUoo with CSA.
PaaidpeUon by CSA oi»y be anwigea by
confiding the Agency Planning DMitan (CPS]i
To ensure that competition is obtained
on ADP procurement to the maximum
practicable-extent agencies shall
Ebtidze solicitations as set forth
low:
(a) Synopses of proposed
^procurements shall be publicized in the
"Commerce Business Daily" (CBD). in
accordance-with the provisions or"
Subpart 1-1.10 (or, if applicable. DAR
Part 1-10) (see also S l-4.1109-6(f]):
(b) Bids and proposals shall be
solicited in accordance with applicable
provisions (see { 9 1-1.302-1 and 1-2^05
(or. if applicable, DAR 1-302.1.1-302.2.
. and 2-205)). However, the CSA
centralized Bidden Mailing List (BMLf
for Federal Supply Classification (FSC)
Group 70 may be used for competitive
ADPE and software procurements as
established in agency procedures.
Agencies may obtain the GS A" BML by a
written request .to the General Services
Administration (8BRC), Building 4,
Denver Federal Center. Denver, CO
80255. The request shall include the
applicable class and BML code ~
numbers).
7010-0001 ADPE System Configuration
7020-0001 ADP Central Processing
Unit (CPU. Computer), Analog
7021-0001 ADP Central Processing
Unit (CPU. Computer). Digital
7022-0001 ADP Central Processing
Unit (CPU. Computer), Hybrid '
7025-0001 Memory-Magnetic Storage
7025-0002 Magnetic Tape Subsystems
7025-0003 Magnetic Disk Subsystems
7025-0004 Printers. High Speed (ADP)
7025-0005 Paper Tape Devices.
7025-0007 Interactive Display '
7025-0008 Interactive Graphics
7025-0009 Interactive Hard Copy
7025-0010 Other ADP Input/Output
and Storage Devices
7030-0001 Operating System
7030-0002 Application Programs
7030-O003 Data Base Management
Programs
7030-0004 Other Software
7035-0001 ADP Accessorial Equipment
7040-0001 Punched Card Equipment
7045-0002 ADP Support Equipment
7050-0001 ADP Component*
The GSA BML which is received may
be used, for subsequent procurements for
items in the class(es) and BML code(s).
provided the solicitation is released to
industry within 90 calendar days
following receipt of the BML in question.
(c) Section l-*.lJO9-3(b) shall be cited
as the authority forthe request For
further, information concerning the
above classes, agencies should'contact
General Services Administration (CDP),
Washington. DC 20405.
(d) Agencies may use the BML for
Standard Industrial Group 0739, BML
Code 4, for ADP maintenance services.
Procedures'for obtaining and using this
DML are the same as those outlined in
paragraph (b} of this section. Section 1-
4.1109-3(d) shall be cited"as the.
authority for requesting this BML
§1-4.1109-4 [Renrved)
§ 1-4.1109-S Small pt
The provisions of Subpart 1-3.8, small
purchases, (or. if applicable. DAR-Part
3-d) apply when the annual aggregate
amount of any one procurement of
ADPE commercially available software,
maintenance services, or related
supplies does not exceed $10,000. except
that FSC group 70 items which are
available on schedule contracts may be
procured from that source.
110
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 4ft No. 2 / Monday. January 5, 1981 / Rotes and Regulations 1205
§1-4.1109-6 Use a* OSA schedule
COntfSCtS*
(a) General (1) Orders placed againat
GSA nonmandatory schedule contracts
under § 1-4.1104 are subject to the
provisions of this § 1-4.1109-0. When a
schedule contract is used pursuant to a
$ 1-4.1104 blanket delegation of
procurement authority, a specific
delegation of procurement authority
from CSA is not required even though
the order is for 8 noncompetitive (sole
source) requirement as defined in § 1-
4.1102-8,
(Z) The existence of nonmandatory
ADP schedule contracts shall not
preclude or waive the requirement for
maximum practicable competition in
obtaining ADPE. software, or
maintenance services, In addition; the
availability of those items under an ADP
schedule contract ahaD not preefude or
otherwise detract from procuring the '
items, including peripheral eqaipment or
items for augmenting an existing system
from a number of different sauces, if
this action will be in the best interest of
the Government
(3) Suitable equipment most be *
considered whether or not this
equipment is on an ADP schedule
contract. Accordingly, when an agency
is procuring tinder the blanket •
delegation of procurement authority
provisions of 1 1-4.1104. maximum
practicable competition shall be sought
When using ADP schedule contracts, the
offerings of each contractor that might
satisfy the agency's requirements shall
be considered. Alternatively, the agency
may choose U> prepare a solkitanoD-
package in an effort to secure
appropriate products and related
services at lower overall costs to> me '
Government: Even though the"
solicitation process consumes time and
resources, it may be in the best interest
of the Government when:
(i) The expected cost reduction wu!
exceed the added costs of acquisition; or
(ii) There is a reasonable expectation
that better offers wul be received from
suppliers other than, the schedule
contractor for suitable items; or
(iii) The agency requirements cannot
be satisfied reasonably by any ADP.
schedule contractor. e.g^,the agency's
requirement "»H» for a fiiirtitnr'"^
package of equipment; training services*
or other features not offered
(b) Initial acquiahioa-of ADPR. Orders.
for the initial acquisition of ADPE* '
whether for purchases or rental, may be
placed against the ADP schedule .
contracts provided that all of the
following, conditions are met.
(1> The order does not exceed the
contract's maximum ocdei limitation
(MOL).
' (2) When the purchase price of the
items covered (even though the items
are rented or leased) exceeds $300.000. a
specific delegation oi procurement
authority is obtained (see $ ft 1-4J104-
l(b)(2) and 1-44105).
[3] The intent to place an order, with.
an order value in excess of $50,000,
against an ADP schedule conn-act is
synopsized in the CBD at least 15
calendar days before placing the order.
(4) The procurement file is
documented with the results of the
synopsis action. If a written response is
received from a responsible source who
expresses a desire to compete OR the
requirement (other than from sources
available and considered under the ADP
schedule cou tract program), the
procurement file also shall be
documented with evidence that nse of
the ADP schedule contract including the
method of acquisition; e.g, lease or
purchase, is the lowest overall cost
alternative to the agency, price and
Other factors considered^
(cj Caatataed rental or lease of
installed ADPE and software.
ADP schedule contracts may be used
for the continued lease or rental of
installed equipment and software-tinder
the provisions of the "schedule contract
However; when orders are for or include
the continued tease-of an installed
central processing unit the orders are
subject to the following?
(IfThe intent to place a renewal
order, with a value in excess of $50,000.
is synopsized in the CBD at least 15
r days before placing the-orderr
and
(2) A specifi
delegation of
procurement authority under § 1-4.1105
is obtained before issuing the renewal
rental or lease order if the schedule
putchese price exceeds SMQjQOO ffnd the
results of the CBD synopsis indicates
that the equipment is available from, a
source otter than, the schedule
contract10
(d) Conversion from lease to purchase
of installed ADPE.
Orders placed against ADP schedule
contracts for the conversion, from lease
to purchase a? installed ADPE are
subject to the following:
(1) The intent to place a purchase
order, with, a net value (purchase price
priced on • iyiten».lifa baita La. the prica of
wcceuive renewal* WBV cuiiihhmt a* an
rcaaCfa.6a.afU
after application of any lease credits or
discounts)- in excess of £50*000* is
synopsized in the CBD at least IS
calendar days before placing the otder,
and
(2) A specific delegation of
procurement authority ts obtained
before issuing an order to purchase
ADPE witb e net purchase order price of
more than $300*000) when '^^^tintl
• (specific make-and model} or suitable
substitute equipment is available from a
supplier other than the •••li«»l"l"»
contractor.
(e) Acquisition of software-and
maintenance services." Orders may be
placed aganuLADP schedule contracts
for software and maintenance services
provided that:
(1) The vame of me order does oat
exceed the MOL of the applicable
schedule contract and
(2) The procurement file is
documented with evidence which
supports use of the schedule contract as
being in the best interest of the
then renewali of inataJM c
under u extended rental plan daring the ongkMlly
planned1 ejntem IH» require neither e CBD iynapife>
nor a deiegatiaacf pnainBHBf ••tharily from
CSA. •
(f) Synopsis jeoaxremanflL
(1) The requirement ID synopsize the
intent to place* an order against ADP
schedule contracts; aa oatnaed m
paragraphs (b), (cj. and f d) of this
section, shall be followed
notwithstanding the exemption in 5 t-
L1003-2(aH5> (or. if applicable. DAR t-
1003.1(c)(v))i These synopses1 shall be
prepared and forwarded in accordance:
with Subpart MJO (or, if applicable
DAR Part 1-10} and shall indnde. as a
minimum, the qaantity, specific make
and model of equipment, date required,
place of installation, period of rental if
applicable, and a point of contact for
further information. The synopsis* shall
indicate that no contract award* wiff be
made on the basis of offers/proposals
received in response to the notice*, siiitm
the synopsiS'Of intent to* pface an- order
against a schedule contract cannot be
considered a-request for offers/
proposals.
(2) Publication1 or contract award
information* in the CBD is not required1
when an order is placed against on ADP
schedule contract whether or not it
follows a cuuujtilftfvt! solicitation, since
the schedule contract was publicized in
accordance with } 1-1.1004.
(g) Actions after the CBD synopsis.
The schedule order synopsis technique
provides agencies with both-die GSA
negotiated schedule prices (derived fton>
discQuntnig prices m the cuuipvtitfve
commercial marketplace) and such
additional product and cost information
" A CBD aynoptia of tie Intent fo place an order
for lofhwanr er na Menace* agdiiif ta ADP
KheduleeoBAvtian
111
-------
1206 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
as might be submitted by potential
suppliers in response to the CBD
notification. Thus, the contracting officer
must make a determination that
ordering from the ADP nonmandatory
schedule is most advantageous to the
Government after consideration of the
affirmative responses received in
response to the CBD notice. The
following actions shall be taken, based
on the contracting officer's decision:
(l)-When no responses are received.
the procurement file shall be
documented with the results of the. CBD
synopsis and the order placed in
accordance with the terms and
conditions of the applicable schedule
contract.
(2) When a response(s) to the CBD
notice is received from a nonschedule
vendor for an item(s) that meets the
user's requirement, the contracting
officer shall take one of the following
actions:
(i) Document the procurement file
with an evaluation which indicates that
the nonschedule item(s) would not meet
the requirement or that the schedule
provided the lowest overall cost
alternative and place the order against
the schedule contract or •
(li) When the evaluation Indicates that
competitive acquisition would be more
advantageous to the Government, the
Contracting Officer normally should
issue a formal solicitation.- In this event
(A) The solicitation should contain^
terms and conditions substantially the
same as those contained in the schedule'
contract in which the order was to be
placed. iWaddressees of the
solicitation shall include the schedule
vendor for the purpose of ascertaining
the vendor's interest in furnishing the
item(s) of the schedule. This procedure
will permit the schedule vendor to
discount the schedule item(&> price since
a discount under a separate proposal
would not be a "price reduction" as
provided in the schedule contracts.
(B) The contracting officer shall -
evaluate the offers received It should be
noted that some vendors may not agree*
to the solicitation terms and conditions
that schedule .vendors have accepted
and that have been incorporated in their
schedule contracts. The contracting
officer shall act in a manner most
advantageous to the Government by
either awarding a contract based on the.
offers- received in response to the -
solicitation or placing an order with a>
vendor under a schedule contract. The
procurement file shall
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 f Monday January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1207
Washington. DC 20405 as required by
§ l-3.802-2(a).
[c] Records provisions concerning the
handling of late submissions under
advertised procedures should be
complied with (see J 1-2.303-8 (or. if
applicable. DAK 2-303.4)). Similar
records shall be maintained concerning
the handling of late submissions under
negotiation procedures.
§ 1-4.tT09-10 UseorfuneaoiwJ
spec Iflc sUonsv
Functional specifications are the
preferred method of expressing the
user's requirements in solicitation
documents. The functional specification
may be augmented with equipment
characteristics and elements of
performance when necessary to reflect
the user's needs. (See FPMR 1101-
35.205.)
$ T-4.tinvit Ueeot
If functional specification* cannot be
used to describe the OKI'S) complete.
requirement, other types* set forth below
may. be used. However, td minmiiaB
limitations on competition, other types
of specification* or purchase
description* shall be used in the onto of
precedence as listed:
[a] Equipment performance
specifications (see 51-4.1102-T3]!
(b) Software and equipment plug-to-
ping compatible' functionally equivalent
fcj Drum! name or eoner piocneBV
descriptions (see 551-1.OT-4 and 1-
1.307-5 (OR if appficebk. DAK 1-
1200.2)); or
(dj Specific make1 ana model puiuiuw
desoTpuuiis f f nis type? or pmrcfaese
description' limits loinpetftfuu Its* uv is*
considered to be anonconpetftfv* (sole
source) requirement and must be
justified)
f1-4.110ft-12 CbmpsiHwBjIMMa
(a) A statement of leqmiements for an
nw noptm!»»MHiii>
acquisition (see FPMR 3 101-3&20B) that
is limited to ADPE and software
compatible with the installed system
shall be:
(1) Supported by a software
canvenma study (see 1 V-kttOM3);
(2) Justified on the basis of agency,
mMMan-aiff*nHal liata pf Of Timing
requirements. and economy »™t
efficiency; and
(3) Meet the requirements of /lUs & 1-
~
(b) Compatibility limited req
• tend to restrict competition and
therefore shall not bamade a mandatory
requirement solely fac reasons of
economy or efficiency. When conversion
costs are to be evaluefed/the
solicitation shall provide for the
submission1 and evaluation of acceptable
itibfo offers from responsible
impa
offerer* that wiO meet the user's
requirement at the lowest overall cost,
price and other factors considered.
(c) The following factors shall be
considered in detenmnins whether the
incorporation of compatibility limited
requirements is justified for the
replacement acquisition.
(1) The essentiality of existing
software, without redesign, to meet
agency critical mission needs. For
example, the continuity of operations
may be so critical that conversion is not
a viable alternative.
(2) The additional risk associated with
conversion if compatibility
iHnntt 816 BOt "fa4 ""^ the
extent to which the Government wonlo
be injured, financially or otherwise, if
theconrenioD to the new ADP system
fails.
(3) Tbe additional advene impact of
facfoxs1 ^1J*K •« delay* mst economic
opportunity, and less' than optimum
utilization/of stilled prof esaionala if
competibib'ty apecificanmui are not
used.
(4) The steps being taken to foster
augmentation! at repl
acquisition (see & 1-3401(41 lot. if
applicable, BAR 3*-10HdU andTPMR.
S101-35J06).
(5J The offloading of selected
data processing service facilities ae an
alternative to coaveraion.
(6) Theextent of essealial pazallet
operations. Lew the need to continue
operation of the old system in parallel
with the sew system until the new
system can fully »"ppf"< tt»n "ijngjfn*
needs.
(d) The finrfiagp th»t support (he use.
of compatibility flp*"^ga*'<'nT «F"*n be
submitted with *""*^ agency
procurement request (see { 1.-4.1105) for
augmentation or replacement ADPE
acquisition, when the. we of these
alirma [g. contemplated.
§ 1-4.1109-13
(a) Software conversion stndfes shall
be performed for all procurements to
ensure that the user's needs are met at
the lowest overall cost price and other
factors, cansidereoV iiichid&jg me cast
and other facton associated wfth
conversion activities. However, a
software conversion aCuuy is not*
required when oneof (he three folTawmg
conditions' exist:
(If Initial acquisition vrlrere no
software smrently exists:
(2] Procurement for computer
penpherals only; or
(3) Exercise of purchase option under
a leasing agreement
(b) Studies for procurements below
the thresholds stated in paragraph (c) of
this section shall be based on
Government estimates determined m ~
accordance with eg
The procurement file shall be
documented U> tecuid the estimates and
the method of computation.
(c)(l) A comprehensive software
conversion study shall be made for each
augmentation or replacement ADPE
acquisition when gi
e at rt» two
following conditions exists:
(i) The estimated purchase pnce of the
ADP equipment system'is expected to
exceed S&SXKOOO. g™**!^ the
maintenance' and support costs; or
(ii) The coat of conversion is to be
used as the primary iustaficanon for a
noncompetitive (sole source}
requirement when the estimated value
of the procurement exceeds SSOOuOOO.
(2) An agency may elect to conduct-its
own comprehensive software
convenient itody. use contractual
resource* to accomplish the study, or
request the GSA Federal Conversion
Support Centet (FCSQ to perform the
study.
(3] Thn software conversion study
shall be maintained in aamcy, files and
be available IDE GSA review at the time
that IheTagency submits to GSA, an
agency procurement request ( APR}.
f1-4LTlO*-r« (Mennmettarof
(a J Costs directly related to me
conversion from the installed ADPE.
software; data bases, fifes, and
telecommunications software (a the
replacement system and project
management costs shall include, but are
not limited to:
(IJ Conversion of (he for/owing
software by Rprogrommfng, rtmdingl or
translation:
[f] Existing software written nr
Federal standard or other ANSI
standard higher level language; and
(ii) Application software written in
assembly orother nonstandaro1
languages that witt continue to meet
essential agency mission' needs without
redesign, provided' that continued use of
the nonstandard software can be
justified and.tbe file is documented with
the justincatioD prior to uicui pututfuu
into the software conversion study; and
[lit] ftfission-essentisl application
software to be> developed For operational
use before the augmentation or
replacement ADPE and operating
system software is installed, (or before
commereiaf ADP service* are procmvtP
113
-------
1208 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday, January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
provided the software is written in
Federal standard or other ANSI
standard languages:
(2) Conversion of data bases, data
base design changes, and data base
management systems designed to the
Conference on Data Systems Languages
(CODASYL1 specifications to the extent
necessary to permit the continued use of
existing application software;
(3) Firmware required solely to permit
the continued use of~application
software;
(4) Site preparation and modifications
to installed environmental controls:
(5) Parallel operation of the old
system during the conversion process.
including offsite data processing
support:
(6) Travel and training expenses.
including pay and fringe benefits of
Government employees during
attendance at formal classroom training
courses: and
(7) Other general and user expenses
directly related to the conversion effort
e.g.. conversion planning, preparation.
and management and supplies and any
additional general-purpose software
required to support the conversion.
(b) The useful life of application
software is limited by changes in data
processing requirements, operating
system software, and equipment
technology. Generally, the life
expectancy of this software, without
redesign or reprogramming. is in the
range of S to 10 yean. Accordingly, the
updating of application sofrware.for
these reasons must be reckoned with.
regardless of whether these programs
are converted from one AOP-system
architecture to another. The costs
incurred for the redesign of application
software in technology updating are not
bona fide conversion costs, and they
shall not be evaluated for the purpose of
determining the lowest total overall cost
offer/bid. These technology updating
costs include:
(1) The conversion of existing
software and data bases which are to be
redesigned;
(2) Purging duplicate or obsolete
software, data bases.-and files;
(3) Development o'f documentation for
existing application software; and
(4) Improvements in management and
operating procedures.
(c) Standard cost factors, such as
those contained in the OMB Cost
Comparison Handbook (Supplement No.
1 to OMB Circular A-78), shall be used
to the maximum practicable extent in
preparing conversion cost studies and
estimates. These cost factors may be
supplemented by industry- or agency-
developed coat factors, as necessary.
§1-4.1109-15 Determination of selection
factors.
The prices offered and estimated
costs of conversion that can be stated in
dollars for software, including data base
management systems, data base
conversion, files conversion, system
test, parallel operations, and other
expenses directly related to the
conversion from installed ADPE and
software to augmentation or
replacement ADPE and software, shall
be included in the evaluation for
determining the lowest overall cost
price and other factors considered. The
following are examples of other factors
to be considered:
(a) Economic benefits clearly
attributable to increased agency
productivity.
(b) Direct savings that would accrue
to the Government from the release of
rented ADPE, discontinuance of
commercial ADP services, or reduction
in telecommunications costs.
(c) Indirect savings derived from
reductions in other than ADPE or ADP
service costs, such as space and/or noa-
ADP personnel support expenses.
(d) Benefits from implementing new
applications which otherwise.would
have to be deferred either indefinitely or
to a significantly distant point-in-time.
(e) Economic advantages resulting
from-providing the capability to
accommodate projected increases in
workload without contracting for further
augmentation or replacement of the
ADPE or acquisition of commercial ADP
services.
(f> Potential savings due to the
availability of software already
"developed and available from the
Federal inventory or commercial
marketplace that could be used to meet
additional agency requirements.
(g) Proven reliability of the equipment
and operating system software in
similar operating environments.
(h) The continued availability of
operating system software support and
maintenance services beyond the initial
system/item life that would enhance the
probability of reutilization of the ADPE
within the Government.
(i) The potential for supporting other
agencies through the ADP sharing
program!
}1-4.1KWMe Software procurements.
When acquiring-commercially
available software, agencies shall strive
to obtain the'fdllowing objectives:
(a) Avoid restrictive clauses that limit
the use of the software to a specific ADP
system, installation, or organization
(b) Incorporate a clause that will
permit other Government agencies to
obtain the software under the contract
being negotiated;
(c) Obtain additional quantity
discounts, should any other Government
agency acquire the same software under
the contract in question: and
(d) Ensure that the vendor is
contractually obligated to support and
maintain the software in subsequent
years.
§1-4.1109-17 Procurement of related
supplies.
Specific purchase programs have been
established by GSA for selected ADP
related supplies (including electronic
data processing tape).lf When the
identical item(s) is available from
multiple sources, contracts are awarded
on a competitive basis. These contracts
are the primary source of supply for the
ADP supplies and support equipment
included therein. Instructions for
ordering these items are- set forth in the
contract (see also § 1-4.1109-7). Specific
purchase programs also have been
established for tabulating machine cards
and marginally punched continuous
forms. (See FPMR §§ 101-28.509 and
101-28.703 for instructions for ordering
tabulating machine cards and
marginally punched continuous forms.
respectively.}
§1-4.1109-18 Furnishing ADP Items and
(a) When the very subject matter of a
contract is.for something other than the
procurement of ADP'items or services
and commercially available ADPE is
incorporated into the non-ADP system
or commercial ADP services are used in
contract performance, the acquisition
and management of the non-ADP system
shall be in accordance with other
applicable regulations, rather than this
subpart (see S l-4.1101(b)(2)).
(b) To" facilitate the reutilization of
ADPE. the Government contractor shall
be required to identify the quantity and
specific make and model of the ADPE
that is delivered as a part of the non-
ADP system. Nevertheless, agencies
shall sever requirements for general
purpose commercially available ADP
items or services from the overall
requirement acquire them in
accordance with these regulations, and
provide them as Government-furnished
property or services to the contractor
when it is operationally feasible to do so
and this action will promotr«conomy.
efficiency, and maximum practicable
competition.
(cj hi those instances when ADP items
or services are severed pursuant to this
subpart and procured .by the
"Similar programs have been eslabllihedfor
support equipment.
114
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1209
Government, care must be taken to
ensure that the prime contractor's ability
and responsibility to perform in
accordance with the contract provisions
are not disturbed.
§1-4.1109-19 Purchase options for
contractor acquired ADPE
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of
§ 1-4.1101. when leased ADPE is used
on Government contract work and the
total coat of leased ADPE is absorbed
by the Government under a cost-
reimbursement type contract the
contracting officer shall require the
contractor to include a provision in the
rental contract stating that the
Government will have the right to
exercise any purchase option and
realize any other benefits earned
through rental payments.
(b) When leased ADPE is used on
Government contract work under a cost-
reimbursement type contract and less
than 100 percent of the cost of. the
equipment is absorbed by the
Government the contracting officer
should obtain for the Government
where possible, the right to realize
accrued purchase option credits. If the
contractor elects not to exercise the
purchase option. Accordingly, agency
negotiation objectives for cost-
reimbursement type contracts shall
include the following when fins than 100
percent of the cost of the equipment fs
absorbed by the Government.
(1) The encouragement of contractors'
to agree to the incorporation in the ADP -
equipment I""*"* of a. Government right
to realize accrued purchase-option •
credits;
(2) 'The obtaining; if possible, of a -
Government right of Oml fofiiadl on
accrued purchase credits if the.
contractor elects not to exercise"the
purchase optuuu nr"f
(3) The providing of an advance 1
of at least BQ-days (120-days. if feasible)
to the Government when thff contractor
proposes to terminate the ADP
equipment lease if the Government has
been granted right* to accrued purchase
option credits:
(c) If the Government has been
granted rights to purchase option credits
in accordance* with paragraph (b) of this
section and the contractor elects not to
exercise the purchase option, the ADPE1
shall be reported through agency or
GSA reutilization. channels as set forth
In FPMR SubpartlOX-saJL.
(d) If the Government efecta. to
03CBICZ8C QD ODttdK tO PBCCOACtt iBB
leased ADPE la accordance with
paragraphs fa} and (b) of this, section, it
is in the-oature of a procurement
Acoordiogiy. the agency shall comply
with the applicable provisions: of this
subpart relating to the acquisition of
ADPE.
§1-4.1109-20 Computer security
requirements.
(a) Specifications for the acquisition
of ADPE. software, maintenance
services, and supplies are required to be
certified by the requiring agency as
meeting the agency security needs. (See
OMB Circular No. A-71, Transmittal
Memorandum No. 1. dated July, 27,1978.
and implementing policies, procedures,
atari HarHa, and guidelines issued by
GSA (sat FPMR Subparts 101-35.3 and
101-36.7). Department of Commerce, and
the Office of Personnel Management.)
These requirements are in addition to
provisions concerning protection of the
privacy of individuals (see § 1-1.327 [or,
if applicable. DAR1-327 and APP.P) and
FPMR Subpart 101-35.17)-
(b) Solicitation specifications shall
include, where applicable:
(1) Agency rules of conduct that a
cuutrauioi and the contractor's
employees shall be required to follow;
(2) A list of the anticipated threats
an A Im'juitli* that have been determined'
by risk analysis that the contractor must
guard against
(3) A description of the safeguards
that the user agency specifically
requires tae contractor to provide;
(4) The standards applicable to the
contractual requirement;
(5) The test methods, procedures.
criteria, and inspection system [or the-
requirement to submit proposals
therefor) necessary to verify and
monitor the operation of the safeguards
during- contnctperfoniancs and to-
discover and counter any new threats or
hazards:
(8) The requirement for periodically
assessing: the security risks involved and
advising potential users, of the-level of
security provided;
(71 Proposed contractual clauses or
y. to provtdn for
the foregoing; and
(8), AT description of the personnel
security requirements.
[c) Evaluations, of- offers for sward.
where applicable, will include:
(1} The adequacy of the proposed
safeguard program:
(2) The presence in plsce of
safeguards, including1 personnel security
.requirements^ and
(3J The* inclusion ia the proposed
contract of clauses thai appropriately
provide for (i) title to safeguards
designed or developed under the
contract (B) control of publication or
disclosure of safeguards whether
GoverBment-nmnBeu or contractor
generated, and fin"} statement of work.
- adjustments, as necessary, to reflect the
contractor's proposal, its evaluation,
and^the contract negotiation.
(d) Contract administration should
include, where applicable momtorship
of the verification and inspection
program for continuing effectiveness of
the safeguard program including
compliance with applicable standards.
procedures; and guidelines incorporated
into-the contract
§ 1-4.1109=-21 Restrictions on the use of
simulation In ADP systems-procurement
(a) Data structured for simulation.
purposes shall not be used as the only
means of describing data processing
requirements in solicitation documents.
Simulation data shall be accompanied
by a narrative description of the, ADP
objectives and workload and any
available application logic diagrams.
(b) Solicitation documents shall not be
structured in such a way as to require
offerers to use a specific computer
system simulator in order to submit their.
offers, but when offerers submit
computer simulation as part of their
offers, they shall be required to; describe
clearly, the simulation used and the
make.and model of tfnr cuuipulei orr
which the simulation was run:
(c) Offers' should not be considered
nonnspoiurive or unacceptable solely on
the basis of simulation resale?.
(d) Procedures for ADP simulation and
computer performance evaluation
services are prescribed in FPMR Sufapart
101-39.14.
} 1-4.1109-2? Use of bencftmsrlof Into*
(a) SoUotBtton* involving low dollar
value procurements generally «ln«n not
require iH*iH!nMrii ks* where pfj^^Bg>|""H>l"B"Tmg or conversion^
unless these programs are
representative of the using agency's
data processing needs.
(b) Mandatary benchmarks shall not
be used, however. In sobatttions for
ADP systems with a purchase value, oi
less than S300.000 unless the using
agency determines that there is no other ~
acceptable means of validation.
(c) For ADP systems with a pnrchase
value of S30ROOO or less, the- fotiowmg.
validating methods shall be considered:
. (1} Validation ol performance by the
technical evaluation of proposed ADPB
and software; or
(2}'Evaluation. Of an nm>mK«nal A HP
installation |m»m««ing a similar
workload on comparable equipment.
115
-------
feuerai Kegister / Vol. 46, No. 2 / Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
§1-4.1109-23 UM of remote terminal
emulation In AOP systems procurement
(a) Each agency shall determine
whether or not to require the mandatory
use of remote terminal emulation during
each AOP system procurement. An
agency should study the GSA
Handbook. Use and Specifications of
Remote Terminal Emulation in ADP
System Acquisitions. '* before making its
determination.
(b) When an agency requires the
mandatory use of remote terminal
emulation during an AOP system
procurement, the agency:
(1) Shall follow all mandatory
procedures contained in the CSA
Handbook:
(2) Shall not require remote terminal
emulation capabilities that are hot
explicitly defined in the GSA Handbook:
(3) May declare an offer'unacceptable
in a negotiated procurement if the
offerer fails to provide the remote
terminal emulation capabilities required
by the solicitation; and
(4) Shall not require an offerer to
conduct a benchmark teat using remote
terminal emulation at the agency's site.
(c) Any agency desiring to deviate
from the policy defined in paragraph (b)_
of this section shall request authority
from GSA. under § 1-4.1100-3
procedures, to deviate before the —
issuance of the solicitation document,
(1) To request a deviation authority;
an agency shall provide to the General
Services Administration (CPS),
Washington, DC, 20405. a detailed.
technical description and justification
for each specific deviation-desired.
(Z) When granted authority to deviate,
an agency shall provide promptly to
potential offerers-detailed instructions
specifying all mandatory remote
terminal emulation capabilities not
defined in the GSA Handbook and the
exact manner in which-each emulation
benchmark test must be conducted. A
notice indicating the availability of
these materials shall be published in-the
Commerce Business Daily (CBD) at least
60 calendar days before the release of
the solicitation document.
"The CSA Handbook. Use and Speoflcatiom of
Remote Terminal Emulation in AOP System,
Acquisitions, hat been prepared lo provide"
guidance to. Federal agenda* in designing and
conducting remote tennlnal emulation benchmark
tests. The Handbook summarize* Introductory
concepts and'tanninology of benchmarking and . .
remote tennlnal emulation, describes when and
how agendet should use remote tennmal emulation.
and spedOes (ha remote terminal emulation
capabilities thai an agency may raquue offered lo
provide for testing ADP systems during acquisition,
Coptefrot the CSA Handbook are available upon
written request lo General Services Administration
(COD). Washington. DC 20406.
§1-4.1109-24 Evaluation factors.
Solicitations shall identify all factors.
including conversion costs, that will be
considered in the evaluation of offers
(see §§ l-3.802(c) (or. if applicable. OAR
3-501. particularly (b)(2) Sec. M(i)) and
1-4.1109-15). The evaluation factors
shall be applied to the mandatory
requirements and the other requirements
indentified as evaluated optional
features, where applicable. When
evaluated optional features are included
in a solicitation, relative importance
•(expressed in dollar values, or points, or.
any other reasonable indicators) shall
be indicated for each feature.
§1-4.1108-25 Implementation of
standards
(a) The standard terminology as set
forth in FPMR Subpart 101-36.13 for
each Federal information processing
standard publication (FTPS PUB).
Federal telecommunications standard
(FED^STD), or joint FIPS/FED-STD that
is applicable, unless waived or excepted
as prescribed by the standard, shall be
included in the solicitation for
procurements underthis Subpart 1-4.11.
FPMR Subpart 101-38.13 provides
standard terminology for use in
solicitations, purchase agreements, and
contracts to give effect to announced
standards. FTPS PUBS are issued by the
National Bureau of Standards and.
collectively constitute the Federal.
Information Processing Standards
Register. Standards are available as set
forth in FPMR § 101-38.1302.
(b) The provisions of FPMR Subpart
101-38.13 an applicable to all Federal
agencies unless the agencies are
otherwise excepted. Waiver procedures
and exceptions are prescribed in the
applicable standards.
(c) If the requirements for compliance
with a standard is changed after release
of a solicitation: e.g.. approval ofa
delayed request for a waiver, the~agency
responsible for the procurement action
shall determine whether a substantial
change in the Government's requirement
has occurred. Action in accordance with
§ l-3.805-l(d) (or. if applicable. DAR 3-
805.4(b)) shall be taken, including
resolidtation if appropriate, based on
the determination.
§ 1-4.1110
The following-clauses shall be used as
specified in solicitations and contracts
for ADP items covered by this Subpart
l-4.lt.
§1-4.1110-1 UmttsjttonofllabWty.
The following clause shall be used in
all solicitations and contracts for ADPE.
commerriaUyavailable software.
maintenance, and related supplies
unless the contracting officer determines
that a higher degree of protection is in
the best interest of the Government.
Warranty ^Exclusion and Limitation of
Damages
Except as expressly set forth in writing in
this agreement or except as provided in the
clause entitled, "Commitments. Warranties.
and Representations." if applicable, and
except for the implied warranty of
merchantability, there are no warranties
expressed or implied. In no event will the
Contractor be liable to the Government for
consequential damages as defined in the
Uniform Commercial Code. Section 2-715, in
effect in the District of Columbia as of
January 1; 1973; i.e.:
Consequentiaidamages resulting from the
seller's breach include:
(a) Any loss resulting from general or
particular requirements and needs of which
the seller at the time of contracting had
reason to know and which could not
reasonably be prevented by cover or
otherwise; aud-
io) Im'tiry to person or property
proxunately resulting from any breach of
warranty.
(End of Clause)
§1-4.1110-2 Contractc
its
•Pi
The following clause shall be used in
all solicitations and conn-acts for ADPE
when the Government's requirement is
set forth in whole or part by functional
specifications and the value of the
contract is expected to exceed $100.000.
Contractor Representation
Unless the Contractor expressly states-
otherwise In the Contractor's proposal where*
functional requirements, are expressly stated
as part of the requirements of this
solicitation, the Contractor.»by responding.
represents that in its opinion the system/
Rem(s) proposed is capable of meeting those
requirements. However* once the system/
item(s) is-accepted by the Government
Contractor responsibility under this clause
ceases. In the event of any inconsistency
between the detailed specification and the
functional specification contained in the
solicitation, the former will control.
§1-4.1110-3 Fixed price options.
(a) A fixed price-contract with
option(s) to exrend-the contract period
of performance and/or to acquire
additional quatities may be in the best
interest of the Government when:
(1) The Government has firm
requirements for the use of ADPE.
commercially available'software, or
maintenance services which extend
beyond the initial fiscal yearc-
• (2) Funds, including funds under
statutes that limit the obligation of funds
to the-fiscal year of their appropriation.
are unavailable beyond the initial fiscal
yean
(3) A reasonable certainty exists that
funds will be available thereafter to
116
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday, January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1211
permit the satisfaction of the
requirements; and
(4) Realistic competition for the
additional periods or quantities may be
impracticable once the initial contract is
awarded.
(b) The evaluation of options is in the
best interest of the Government at the
time of initial award because it reduces
the possibility of a buy-in and motivates
price competition on a system/item life
basis. "Buy-in" refers to the practice of
attempting to obtain a contract award
by knowingly offering a price less than
anticipated costs with the expectation, of
receiving "follow-on" awards (where
effective competition can be anticipated
to be less) at prices at least nigh enough
to recover any losses on the original
"buy-in" contract The long-term effects
of this practice may diminish
competition and may result in poor
contract performance and higher long-
term prices to the Government.
(c) One-time charges (startup and
other nonrecurring costs); such as
documentation, manuals, initial training
requirements, etc.. may be significant for
a particular solicitation. An offerer may
intend to absorb some portion of these
costs or may plan to recover them
(amortize over) in connection with
possible "follow-on" awards. Incumbent
offerers could* enjoy a competitive
advantage since it may not be necessary
to include portions of these coats. In
addition, offerers with relatively
broader markets and/or stronger
financial resources-tend to have greater
flexibility with respect to anyone
individual procurement-action. The
evaluation of system/item life prices
promotes greater competition by
evening out these advantages and
encourages lower system/item life
pricing.
(d)(l) When considering options, care
should be exercised in making the
distinction between (i) discontinuance
charges; i.e^ termination settlement
compensation (the term includes
prenegotiated contractual payment
provisions) for discontinuance of
performance during the initial contract
period of performance or during an
exercised option period of performance,
(ii) separate charges for the
Government's failure to exercise an
option to extend the period of
performance- or to acquire- additional
quantitiesr and (iii) contracting for
evaluated optionaLfeatures (see { 1-
4.1102-14) which is outside the scope of
this 9 1-4.1110-3.
(2) A provision in a-contract that calls-
fora paymenuthat reflects the addition
of a separate charge to a contract price-
is illegal if the charge when added to the
contract price exceeds- the amount that
""reasonably represents the value ofbona
fide fiscal year requirements. (See 31
U.S.C. 66Sa. 31 U.S.C. 712a. and 41
U.S.C. 11.) To preclude the offering of
these illegal charges (because of the
nonexercise of options) when options
are to be incorporated into a contract.
separate charges in any form shall not
be solicited. Solicitations shall provide
that offers containing any charges for
the Government's failure to exercise any
option will be rejected. The solicitation/
contract provision entitled "Fixed-Price
Options" authorized by this § 1-4.1110-3
so provides.
(e)(l) When the fixed price options
provision is used, the Government and
the contractor may find it mutually
advantageous to incorporate a special
contractual provision containing specific
notice and settlement terms to cover
discontinuance of rental of equipment or
software during the contract period of
performance. The solicitation/contract
provision entitled "Discontinuance
Repricing" (see paragraph (h) of this
§ 1-4.1110-3) shall be used for this
purpose. This provision is in addition to
and takes precedence over the required
standard'termination for convenience
clause when the contracting parties
mutually agree-to incorporation of the
provision in the contract In the event
the provision is not incorporated,
discontinuance shall be governed solely
by the required standard termination for
convenience clause.
' (2) The special "Discontinuance
Repricing" provision provides notice of
discontinuance and settlement payment
terms. A means is provided to determine
finitely discontinuance charges within a
ceiling price that ensures that the value
of the discontinued requirement and the
contract value of the requirement for the
applicable conn-act period are
reasonable. It provides the opportunity
for a lower price offer by covering the
risk of discontinuance with specified
repricing provisions.
(3) Neither the incorporation of the
provision in the contract nor the
calculation and comparison of potential
discontinuance charges shall be
considered as a factor in- the evaluation
and selection for award.
(f)(l) The exercise of an option by-the
Government shall be made only if it is
determined that (i) funds an available,
(ii) the requirement covered by the
option fulfills.an existing need of the
Government and (iii) the exercise of the
option is the most advantageous method
of Fulfilling the Government's need, price
and other factors considered.
(2) The-determination shall be set
forth in writing and made a part of the
contract file.
(g) When the circumstances discussed
in paragraph (aj of this § 1-4.1110-3 are
applicable, the following solicitation/
contract provision, entitled "Fixed-Price
Options," shall be inserted in the
solicitation. The data required for the
"fill-ins" should be suitably highlighted.
and inapplicable bracketed portions
should be deleted. When the "Fixed
Price Options" provision is used, the
solicitation shall also specify:
(1] The system/item life;
(2) The present value discount
"methodology, including payment
schedule, that will be used for purposes
of award evaluation: and
- (3) The option penods of performance
and option quantities, as appropriate.
Fixed Price Options Provision
(a) This solicitation is being conducted on
the basis that the known requirements extend
beyond the initial contract period (and
exceed the basic quantity]' to be awarded
but due to-the-unavailability of funds,
including statutory limitations on obligation -
of funds, the optton(s) cannot be exercised at
the time of award of the initial contract. '
There-is a reasonable certainty that funds
will be available thereafter to permit exercise
of the options^ilecauM realistic-competition
for the option periods [and quantity]* is
impracticable once the initial contracUs
awarded, it is in the best interest of the
Government to evaluate options in order to
eliminate the possibility of a "buy-in."
(b) In order to safeguard (he integrity of the
Government's evaluation and because the
Government is required to procure ADPE and
related Hems on the basis of fulfilling the
systems life requirement at the lowest overall
cost, price and other factors considered.
requirements for optional penods (and
additional quantities) * as well ac initial
requirements will be evaluated for award on
a fixed pnce basis. Since the systems-or
items to be procured under the solicitation
have an exjTected life of" months (hereafter
referred as "system life" or "item life-," as
appropriate), and since lowest system (item)
life costs an synonymous with lowest overall
costs, the contract resulting from this
solicitation will contain optfons at fixed
pnces for renewals for subsequent penods
based on fiscal yean throughout the
projected system (item) life (and options at
fixed prices for all stated optional quantities
of supplies or services not included in the
initial requirements|'.Despite the foregoing, *
offerers are reminded that although the
evaluattotfthatwiU lead to contract award
will be based-on system (Hem) life costs, the
award of the initial contract aa well as the
exercise of the-ophon(s) is dependent not
only on the continued existence of the
requirement and the availability of funds but
also on an affirmative determination that
each exercise of an option is in the best
Interest of the Government.
•Delete-win
applicable.-
'* Insert the specific number of months applicable
to the sollalalloiL
117
-------
1212
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday. January 5, 1961 / Rules and Regulations
(e) OpUoiu included In offers submitted, in
response to this solicitation will be evaluated
as follows:
(1) Firm Fixed Prices. To be considered
acceptable under the solicitation, offerers
must offer (i) fixed prices for the initial
contract period for the initial system- or Items1
being procured. (li) fixed prices or price*
which can be finitely determined for each
separate-optfon^enewal period, which price*
must remain in effect throughout that period;
[and (iil) fixed prices or prices, which can be
finitely detenntnedfar all required option
quantities)*.
(2) Evaluation of Awes. Offers witt.be
evaluated for purposes of award by adding
the- total price of all optional periods- fand all
stated optional quantities! * to the total price-
far the initial contract period coveting the
initial system or items* These paces- will be
adjusted by the appropriate discount factors
shown in"* of the solicitation document
Evaluation of option prices will not obligate
the GoveBoneat ta-exerdae the-options* -
Offers which d»nat include fixed or
detenninabla system.(item) life prices cannot
be evaluated fas the total systems life-
reqHBement and will be refected. Offer*
which, meet Ihs-mandstoij leqnireaents, wUL
be evaluated, on. the basis of lowest overall
cost to the-gaTemmenfc, price and other
fi
will also bvevaiaated
rgaa. Separate chacges. uv
(3) Separate CB
snv fusev frrfr DO! t
any charges, for faihua to exercise any option.
will be rejected.
(d) Selection, of as offer shall be mada on.
the baaisi «f lowest o»enll coat, prica and
other factors conBidHiwi, ta thaGaverament
presided that the contract price reaaenahly
requirements* rath
extent. »parttan>af.any other fiscal year's:
Tespecttathaconttact prica shall bo, mada,
aftac i
| oFcatalesnriaaalac short term.
leases* ofienc sy»tam- startup, expense*.
oiBiuiipmaiii.saftw
tfatanuBalTinklft.!
vendor support. II a.
that aaofiec daocnot meet taeaa criteria^ tl
offercanaolbe aGGSptedfaa-awanL
(e) Award of an-initiai connact arillnot
*"1* toexaxciae any
v Print tn
that exacdaa- of ma- ootiao i* the- moat.
consideied*
(tl EMIinaita.
obligate dm
other than tt
exercised options*
d othei fadbtar
payment schedule-on ipadfied.
(g).The following provuion(s) shatt be
included ia any contract resulting from this
solicitation.
OptfnrTo Extend the Teat of the Contract
This-contract is renewable at the prices
staled elsewhere in toe-contract, at the option
of the Government, by the Contracting
Officer giving written-notice of renewal to lha
Contractor by the first day of each fiscal year
of the Government or within 30 days after
funds for that fiscal year become available.
whichever date is the later provided tttat the
Contracting Officer shell have given
preliminary notice of th» Government's
ihleniios ta renew at least*"* days before
this contract is to expire. Such a preliminary
notice of: intent to renew shell not be deemed
(o commit (he Government la renewals. If the
Government exercises tfiis option for
renewal the contracr as renewed shaJTbe
However, the total duration of this contraetr
Including the-exercise of any options under
Option fox Increased; Quantity
The Government may fncceeea the i*»™»
called for herein by the quantities stated and
at the unitprfcBB,speclfled:elsewhere in thte
contracc The* Contracting- Officer may
exerefsff this-option at any tfine-within the
period specified • the eantnut by giving
Jteins added (vends*of UueoBtiast shell
be fagflff****^*"^**^^ ihs delivery schedule
set fbrtkeisBwheralBthiftcoatmct.*
• (EndofsoUcitatiaa/cooimck provision^
inserted in the solid taltaa whan, the
Govenment "«mrfA»" id appropriate to
da SOL {So* paragraph (e£o£ tbnt i 1—
4j-mhA| Thercantzack may contain, this
canttaeti&g pactfa* naituaUjr agfee to Os
IBBBEtkUL Thft OnBEBB- B pZOTinBCL BD
"II* ** ^"^y **" imH""** "• «*• "•••
box in the «Qlidtatfamj(cflntrKk
DisvBBJsnenBT Beaiicfaig Ptovtainr
(afBy the mcorporatian ofthiftaolTcilation/'
contract provision In this solfcitatlon ths.
Govennttenc 100168408- its'wiilmgness to-
Incorpore* the* contrast pnvtskm entitled
•^Hacostiinaancet efBsntat and Bepridng"'
UltO the g*»il***^. HlalilHiig- nntlt tfria.
alternative to standard teaninBttfin for
(5) tin foirowing.exampfe.illUafrHftfl the
opeRtfes or tBsT praviif onL
— Monthfy rental prica. eSecttva for the
peribdin which- the diacandnuance date
falls for me discontinued' Hem as staled in
-tMendilyteBtef price tor tJ»ltwn.efl«etlvB-
at the nmetoffiAMaiMidteriha system
contract as stated la the vendor's ADP
schedule contract (or the established
commeraa) catalog price al the same time.
if lower or If no ADP schedule contract
effective)—SI20.
—Months of rental prior to the
discontinuance date during the initial or
option contract period of performance in
which I
irges earned during the
applicable period of performance' (10 x
—Discontinuance-charges to be added at
discontinuance date ([$120 - $90) x
$300:
—Total rental charges plus discontinuance
charge* (SB00- +• S300)—SL200.
—Ceiling-on total of rental charges and:
discontinuance repricing charge* (12. x
SBOJ—41.088.
—Total, price during, period for the
disoonlimiad Sam (SX.08Q cexllfla Towec
than total rental earned plus
discontinuance charge*)—51,080.
(c) Offaeoffafectian. The undenigned
offerer ,C agrees. Qdecluies. the
incorporation of the following contract
provision in-any contract which may result
from this sollcttaflon.
(ajiTheGo
entitled "TenniiiatlQn for the, GoaWefliensa of
option peziod of pwforn>nnnn oJ thto contiacta*
dfsoo&tiiioft renteT of any ea uipnent or
software on a date specified in a written
notice providiBd Itx the Contractor not lave
than 39 dfljep prior ta-th? vpeciffafi
discontiznmnae dates TEeGavenuBcntmay1
fliscontiftna* oi*y CTP^BJ flrsnflnrtBf B
(b) In tbe-eveat of dlacenttn
ca-of rental
shall pap
Contractor as computed' In accordance wiln
this paragraph (bl. The charges, ahafi oe the
femaindepobtaJned* by subliiii»llii||.tno'
contracr monthly mttai price- eflsettsv at me
trft date for the discontinued
limit tonrvtlM
rental price Eorthe item
tcheduje contract or thftesttUlsled
commercial. catalog price, whichever uvlau,
effective at the- time, of award of the
contract1 s initial period of performance,
multiplied by the number of months tnvifem
was rented1 during the pmiiimip" ^mtrart
period1 or ponomenee' (Initial or optfonf ta>
which tfie discontihiiancewa*erTecti«ai
prerided. In &» event shall the. tom£o£
termination reprising: charges and thai
contract rentef price fee the-aumbet of
months the itaia wanenteri' rlurtna the period,
IB which dlaranlimmnnB was. affectlva
exceed tbe contract prica for tna item-lor ma
entire period
(c) The provisions- of this cnoM sfaalP
prevad- when- nofceiiBiBBaHr to this- efaose-is'
made.-
/contract
deteimiitasuui a longer period Is •pproprtu*.
The GSt\ Solicitation, Document for
AOPEqjuipmenl System* contain*
118
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 2 / Monday. January 5, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1213
clauses regarding special provisions •
(Section E) and contractor support
(Section G). These clauses may be used
if they meet the requirements of the
user. A limited number of copies of this
solicitation document is available from
CSA (CPEP), Washington. DC 20405.
§1-4.1112 Assistance by GSA.
Assistance in any phase of the
procurement process covered by this
Subpart 1-4.11 may be obtained by
contacting- the General Services
Administration (CPS), Washington. D6
20405.
- Dated: December 29. 1980.
Ray Kline.
Acting Administrator of General Services.
|FR Doc. 61-00082 Filed 1-2-81. 8:15 am|
41 CFR Parts 101-35 and 101-36
(FPMR Amendment F-44) •
Management, Acquisition, and
Utilization of Automatic Data
Processing (AOP) Resources
AGENCY: General Services
Administration.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation provides a
complete revision of Subpart 101-35.2
regarding general policies and
procedures relatinglo the management,
acquisition, and utilization of ADP
equipment (ADPE); software,
maintenance, related supplies. ADP
services, and ADP related services by
Federal agencies. This action is needed
to change, consolidate, and clarify *
policies and procedures. The intended
effect is to reduce paperwork regarding
agency ADP resources management
EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation is .
effective [anuary 15, 1981, but may be'
observed earlier.
FOR-FURTHEN INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roger W. Walker. Procurement Policy
and Regulations Branch. Policy and
Analysis Division. Office of Policy and
Planning. ADTS, 202-560-0194.
SUPPUMENTARV INFORMATION: (afA
proposed revision of Subpart 101-35.2 '
(and FPR Subpart 1-4.11) was circulated
to all Federal agencies and other.
interested parties on May 28, 1980. The-
closing of. the comment period waa
November 14-1980 (45 FR 71628. Oct 29,
1980). All comments received have been
considered and accommodated to the
extent considered appropriate.
(b) A complete revision of Subpart
101-35.2 is provided. Substantive
changes from the existing coverage are
as follows:
(1) Section 101-35.200 is added to set
forth the scope of the subpart. replacing
the purpose and supersession sections
(101-35.201 and 101-35.202).'
(2) Subsection 101-35.200-1 is added
to set forth the relationship of the
subpart to other directives.1
(3] Section 101-35.201 is revised to
clarify the applicability of the subpart.
replacing 5 101-35.204.
(4) Section 101-35.202 is revised to
provide definitions, replacing §| 101-
35.205 and 101-35.209 and Appendix A.
(5) Section 101-35.203 is revised and
the following subsections are added to'
provide restated policies, with emphasis
on management of the process for
determining the ADP need, replacing
§§ 101-35.203.101-35.296, and 101-
35.207.
(6) Sections 101-35.204 through 101-
35.210 are revised and § 101-35.211 is
added to provide changed provisions
regarding planning requirements,
specifications-and purchase
descriptions, conversion management
and planning, conversion procurement
and management responsibilities,
software conversion studies.-
determination of need and requirements
analysis, severable ADP requirements,
determination of system/item life,
comparative cost-analysis, evaluation of
acquisition alternatives, and least cost
acquisition.1 -
_ (7) Section 101-35.212 is added to
providtfor a GSA contact point for
assistance, reflating g 101-35.210.'
(c) Subpart 101-36.4 is removed from
Subchapter F of the FPMR. Management
responsibilities related to procurement
have been consolidated in Subpart 101-
35.2 as revised by this regulation and
FPR, Subpart 1-4.11 as revised by a
concurrent regulation.
• (d) Subpart 101-35.15 is removed from
Subchapter Fof the FPMR. Planning
requirements are set forth in § 101-
35.204 of this regulation.
'Thia regulation supersedes the present Subpart
101-3&Z Appendix A thereto, and Its processor.
Federal Management Circular 74-5. dalad July 30.
1974.
•With, the cancellation of Subpart 101-38.4 by (his
KguistioiL (he references to pertuunt sections of
the Federal Procurement Regulation* (FPR) should
be particularly noted. Paragraph (b) ii reeerved for
a reference to piepuaed FPR Subpart 1-4.12 covering
ADP services-procurement.
'Collectively these subjects establish
management requirement* that replace- somo
specific, lteoKe.g. general systems or feasibility
study thresholds, conversion and residual value
' provisions, and- ma interim upgrade concept With
raferenca.ro I nn-35J08-t thresholds established
in FPMR Temporary .Regulation P-49Z will be
superseded by FPR (11-4.1100-13 and 1-4,1206-1
(proposed). In addition, note that FPMR Temporary
..Regulation F-4M previously suspended the
reporting provisions of Subpart 101-08.19 that is
abolished by this regulation.
(e) The changes in this regulation*
were developed concurrently with
substantive changes to existing
provisions in FPR Subpart 1-4.11—
Procurement and Contracting for
Government-wide Automatic Data
Processing Equipment, Software.
Maintenance Services, and Supplies.
This Subpart 101-35.2 is intended to be
used in concert with Subpart 1-4.11 of
' the FPR.
(f) This regulation cancels FPMR
Temporary Regulation F-493 (45 FR
3271. January 17. I960) which is deleted
from the appendix at the end of
Subchapter F of 41 CFR Chapter 101.
This regulation cancels FPMR Subparts
101-36.4 and 101-36.15.
(g) The General Services
Administration has determined that tins
regulation will not impose unnecessary
burdens on the economy or on
individuals and. therefore, is not
significant for the purposes of Executive
Order 12044?
PART 101-35—ADP AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
MANAGEMENT POLICY
1. The table of contents for Part 101-
35 is changed by-revising one subpart.
as followa:
Subpart 10t-3U-Management
Acquisition, and Utilization of Automatic
Data Processing (AOP) Resources
Sec.
101-35.200 Scope of subpart.
101-35^00-1 Relationship to other
directives,
101-35.201 Applicability.
101-35.202 Definitions.
101-35.202-1 Automatic data processing
equipment.
101-35.202-2 Software terms.
101-35.202-3 Firmware.
101-35.202-4 Maintenance services.
101-35.202-5 Related supplies.
101-35.202-6 ADP services.
101-35.202-7 ADP related services.
101-35.202-8 Commercial ADP services.
101-35.202-0 Federal agency.
. 101-35.203 Policies.
101-35.203-1 Competition^
101-35.203-2 Responsibilities.
101-35.203-3 ADP plans.
101-35.203-4 Requirement* analysis.
101-35.203-5 Urgent requirements.
101-35.203-6 Conversion management and
~ planning;
101-35.203-7 Sharing and rautilization.
101-35203-a Privacy and security.
101*35.203-0 Standards.
101-35J03-10- Furnishing ADP items and
services to contractors.
101-35.204 Planning requirements.
101-35.205 Specifications and purchase
descriptions.
101-35.200 Conversion management and
planning.
101-35^08-1 Procurement and management
responsibilities.
119
-------
1214 Federal Register f Vol. 46. No. I f Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
Sec.
101-35-208-2 Software conversion
respomibiJities.
10I-3&207 Determination of need and
analysis.
101~3UQ7-1 Severaola ADP requirements.
101-35.208 Determination of system/item
life.
101-35.209 Comparative cost analysis.
101-35.210 Evaluation of acquisition
alternatives.
101-35.211 Least coal acquisition.
101-3&2& AssMtone of GSA.
Authority: Section 205(ct 83 Slat. 390: 40
U.&C «6(c).
2. Subpart 101-3&2 is revised to read
aa follows:
Subpart 101-35.2— Management,
Acquisition, and Utilization of
Automatic Data. Praceaaing (ADP)
Resources
§101-3UOO Scope of subpart.
(a) This subpart seta forth general
policiea and procedures relating to the
management, acquisition, and utilization
of ADP equipment (ADP&K software,
maintenance, related supplies, ADP
services, and ADP related services by
Federal agencies.
(b] The objectives, of this aubpart are
to promote full and open competition
among suppliers who are capable of
meeting the user's- ADP needs and to
satisfy these needs at the lowest overaO
cost, price and other factors considered.
g 10I-3SJOO-1
(a) Subpart 1-4.11 of the Federal
Procurement Regulations [41CPR
Chapter thereafter referred to as the
FPR) prescribes policies and procedures
governing the procurement and
contracting for all ADPE. eommeroaUy
available software; maintenance
services, and related supplies.
(b) [Reserved]
(cj ParttOl-36 provide* detailed
policies, procedures, and guidance
pertaining to the Government-wide
management of ADPE. software, and
related matters including revolving fond.
resources utilization. reatOizatfoir of
equipment ADP management
information systems, standards, and
computer performance evaluation.
(d) The acquisition, management, and
utilization of ADP an subject tn the
fiscal and policy control of the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). IB
addition. OMB Qrcmars Jndndmg A-10,
A-ll. A-71. A-108. and Transmittal
Memoranda related thereto apply to
ADP; the present value concept in A-0*
also applies (see { 101-33.210). The
applicability of A-76 andA-108 to
agency activities is aa determined and
directed by OMB.
[a} Federal agencies. The policies and
procedures set forth in this Subpart 101-
35.2 apply to the management.
acquisition, and utilization of ADPE,
software, maintenance services, related
supplies. ADP services, and ADP related
services (see 9 101-35.202 for
definitions) by Federal agencies
regardless of use or application
including Government-acquired ADPE,
software, or related supplies provided to
contractors.'
(b} Government contractors. (1)
Except** set form in paragraph (b)(2) of
this section, agencies shall require their
contractors to apply the policies and
procedures set forth in this Subp&rt to
the management, acquisition, and
utilization of ADPE, commercially
available software, maintenance
services* and related supplies when the
very subject matter of the contractf s) is
for the performance of commercial ADP
services for a Federal agency (see
j ft, lOl-aSJOa-ftand 101-35.203-101; and
[ij The Government requires the
contractor to purchase the ADPE or
software for the account of the
Government: or
(ii) The Government requires the
contractor tapes* title ta the ADPE or
software to the Government; or
(iii) The Government pays the fuD
lease costs of the ADPE or software ,
under a cost-reimbursement contract.
(2) When the very subject matter of a
contract Is EbrMmetbioB otter t^an *ha
procurement of ADP items or services.
and-commercially available ADPE Is
incorporated intathe nan-ADP system
01 rnmrnofnat J.np seiYiCBS aie USed M
contract performance, the acquisition
and management of ft"* nan.-ADP system
shall be fa accordance with other
applicable regulations rather than this
Subpart 101-3&Z (but see S 101-35.203-
10).
SW1-3U02
The terms used in this subpart shall
have the meanings set forth in this
section.
} 101-35^02-1 Automatic data processing
equipment
"Automatic data processing
equipment" (ADPE) means' general
pappose, commercially available, mass-
produced automatic data processing
devices; Le* components and the
1 Tta acqoMtfan of Joint Cmmlfler on Wn tag
fJCPf continued mpdpuunt hi PSC Cranp 70
jLJ^_(^J t— •_/n*4HM MUM^^^H* ftmmJ SlfT Inrm
uBQiEBiHi ro yttuuuf proctmBv 9110 utilizing
campufBTfKhnology, iuefudhxggt
•yitnn, tntepoted prtntteg vymu.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 2 / Monday, January 5, 1981 / Rules and Regulations
1215
sort-merge programs, maintenance-
diagnostic programs, and applications
programs. The term encompasses
operating systems software,
independent subroutines, related groups
of routines, sets or systems of programs,
software documentation, firmware (see
§ 101-35.202-3), and computer data
bases whether Government-owned or
commercially available.
(b) "Commercially available
software" means software that is
available through lease or purchase in
the commercial market from a concern
representing itself to have ownership
and/or marketing rights in the software.
Software that is furnished as part of the
ADP system but that is separately
priced, is included.
(c) "Application software" means a
series of instructions or statements in a
form acceptable to a computer, designed
to cause the computer to execute an-
operation'or operations necessary to
proces8_requirements such as payroUT
inventory control, or automatic.test and
engineering analysis. Application
software may be either machine-
dependent or machine-independent, and
may be general-purpose in nature or be
designed to satisfy the requirements of a
specialized process or a particular user.
(d) "Computer data base" means a
stored collection of data in a form
capable of being processed and
operated on or by a computer; i.e., the
elements-of stared data used by a
computer in responding to a computer
program.
(e) "Computer software
documentation" means recorded
information including computer listings
and printouts that (1) documents the
design or details of computer software,
[2] explains the capabilities of-the
software, (3) provides data for testing
the software, or (4) provides gperating
instructions,
(f) "Software conversion" means the
transformation, without functional
change, of computer programs or data
elements to permit their use on a . '
replacement or changed ADP equipment
system or teleprocessing service.
(g) "Software redesign" means any
change to software that involves a
change in the functional specifications
for that software.
(h) "ReprogrammiRg" mentis any
change to software that deviates from
the design specifications for that
software but preserves the functional
' requirements of the user.
(i) "Receding" means a manual
changed) software on a line-for-line
basis that preserves both the functional
requirements and software design
specifications.
(j) "Automated translation" means
changes to software including machine-
processed receding that preserve both
.the functional requirements and
software design specifications to the
extent that no changes are apparent to
the user.
§ 101-3SL202-3
"Firmware" means any ADP
hardware-oriented programming at the
basic logic level of the computer that is
used for machine-control, error recovery,
mathematical functions, applications
programs, engineering analysis
programs, and the like. Included are
firmware that if furnished with ADPE.
commercially available proprietary •
firmware that is acquired separately
from ADPE. and all vendor
documentation and manuals relating
thereto. •
§101^202-4 Maintenance services.
"Maintenance services" means those
examination, testing, repair, or part
replacement functions performed to: (a)
Reduce the probability of ADPE
malfunction (commonly referred to as
•"preventive maintenance"), (b) restore
to its proper operating status a
'component of ADPE maids not
functioning properly (commonly referred
to as "remedial maintenance"), or (c)
modify the ADPE in a minor way
(commonly referred to as "field
engineering change" or "field
modification").
5101-3^202-5 Related supplies.
"Related supplies" means consumable
items designed specifically for use with
ADPE, such as computer tape, ribbons,
punchcards, and tabulating paper.
§ 101-31202-8" ADP services.
"ADP services" means the
computation or manipulation of data in
support of administrative, financial,
communicative, scientific, or other
similar Federal agency data processing
applications. It includes teleprocessing
(including remote batch) and local batch
processing.
rtetfi
vie
§101-36.202-7 AOPl
"ADP related services" means source
data entry, conversion, training, studies.
facilities management, systems analysis
and design, programming, and
equipment operation that are adjunct
and essential to agency ADP activities
but do not involve Ihe actual
computation-or manipulation of data.
S101-3U03-* Commercial ADP service*.
"Commercial ADP services" means
the performance of ADP services and
ADP related services by private
contractors on a nonpersonal services
basis. For the purposes of this Subpart
101-35.2. commercial ADP services do
not include: (a) Services performed by
contractors under contracts where the
subject matter of the contract is not the
furnishing of ADP services or ADP
related services lo a Federal agency, (b)
employment of experts and consultants
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109. or (c],
"personal services" contracting where
the contractor or the contractor
employees are in effect employees of the
Government.
{101-3U02-9 Federal agency.
"Federal agency" means (a) any
executive agency (executive department
or independent establishment in the
executive branch including any wholly
owned Government corporation) or (b]
any establishment in the legislative or
judicial branch of the Government
(except the Senate, the House of
Representatives, and the Architect of
the Capitol and any activities under the
Architect's direction) (see 40 U.S.C. 472).
§101-3&203 Policies.
$ 101-3i203-1 - Competition.
Full and open competition is a basic
procurement objective of the
Government The maximum practicable
competition among offerers "who are
capable of meeting the user's needs will
ensure that the Government's-ADP
needs are satisfied at the lowest overall
cost, price and other factors considered.
over the system/item. This extends to
actions necessary to foster competitive "
conditions for subsequent procurements.
To meet fully the lowest overall cost
objective, it is essential that proper
management and planning actions be
accomplished before the acquisition
becomes imminent (see § 101-35.206).
§101-3&203-2 Responsibilities.
Agency ADP managers and
contracting officers share the
responsibility for ensuring that the basic
procurement objective is met (see § 101-
35.203-1). This responsibility extends to
fostering competitive conditions for
subsequent procurements.
S101-3&203-3 ADP plans.
Agency ADP management officials are
responsible for monitoring data
processing requirements and for '
developing plans to meet future needs at
the lowest overall cost. Plans should
include initial acquisitions and
augmentation or replacement of
installed ADPE and software (see j 101-
35.204).
§ 101-3&203-4 Requtr
•lysis.
The acquisition of an initial ADP
capability or the augmentation or
121
-------
1218 Federal Register / VoL 4S. No. 2 / Monday, January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations-
replacement of an existing capability
shall be preceded by a comprehensive
requirements analysis ^g™"1011?11"*^0
with, the scope and complexity of the
program objectives and mission needs.
The operational and economic
feasibility of all alternative ««l"tf""»,
including use of non-ADP resources.
sharing, use of commerciai ADP
services, and reutilization. of excess
Government-owned OF f««»»»d equipment
shall be considered (see S lOWSJOTJ.
J101-35J03-6
The exist
Ur
of a public exigency;
i.a, the Government will suffer serious
injury, financial or otherwise, if the
.equipment or services are not available
by a specific date, shaH not relieve the
agency from the responsibility for
obtaining «nnyiimmi practicable
competition (see FPR $& 1-3.202 [or. if
applicable, DAR 3-202) and l-fc!102-fllJ.
§tOV3&203-« Conversion HMnagsmsnt
Agency ADP tnan<*ITffrfr ahull
those steps as may be feasible to
minimiM tbe risk aad.cosl"of conversion
to replacement ADP systems and
services (see i 101-3&206) to achieve
economy and efficiency in meeting
agency needs.
§ 10T-36L203t7 Snaring sod i
Sharing installed ADPE ani^- software
or "»<"ff available w*w Government*
owned, or leased ADPE shall be the
primary source for meeting the ADP
requirements of the user (see Subparts
101-3&2 and 10L-3&3). Additional ADP
capacity shall be acquired only if
existing resources will not economically
and efficiently meet the requirements. .
§ 101-35L20»-r PHvecy
ADP managen shall establish
safeguards necessary for the adequate
protection ofpersonal privacy and the
physical security of an ADP JiM
(see Subpartft 101-35.3 and 101-35J.7J.
Federal information pro
standards publications (PIPS PUBS) and
Federal
(FED-STD) shall be implemented when
applicable. Procedures for waiver or
exception shall be complied with for
each applicable mandatory PEPS PUB or •
FED-STD that is- not implemented (see
Subpart 101-38.13 J.
§ 101-3&209-10
Ito
(a) When the very subject matter of a
contract is foe «"T»»thin^ QiKffr tha& thft
procurement of ADP items ox services.
and commercially avaOabie ADPE is
incorporated Into the non-ADP system'
or commercial ADP services are used in
contract performance, the acquisition
and management of the non-ADP system
shall be in accordance with other
applicable regulations/rather than >M^
subpart (see 9 101-35J01(b)(2)).
(b) To facilitate the reutilization of
ADPE, the Government contractor shall
be required to identify the quantity and
specific make *""* model of the ADPE •
that is delivered as a part of the non-
ADP system. Nevertheless, agencies'
shall sevei requirements for general
purpose commercially available ADP
items or services from the overall
requirement, acquire them in
accordance with these regulations, and
provide them as Government-furnished
property or services to the contractor
when it is operationally feasible to do so
and this action will promote economy.
efficiency, and maximum practicable
competition.
(c) In those instances, when ADP items
or services are suvuiud pursuant to this
subpart and procured by the
Government care mast be taken to
ensure that the prime contractor's ability
miA lyffffflnffipip^y to BSSIOHB in
accordance with the contract provisions
are not disturbed.
{101-3U04 Plannlno, requirements.
(a) Agencies are required to prepare
and submit annual agency-wide ADP
plans in accordance with OMB Circular
A-ll. A copy of this plan shaU.be
provided to GSA (CPS) concurrently
with each submission to OMB. The
following supplemental information
shall be submitted to GSA (CPSJ with
this plan:
(1) Trends in data processing
workloads that will or may saturate.
existing ADP system capabilities prior
to expiration of the fnO established'
initial user's system/itemfs} life.
(2) Opportunities to take advantage of
cost effective enhancements brought
about by new ADPE technology,
improvements^ and "^Htj^it in
the marketplace.
(3) Actions planned regarding system
redesign to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of application software,
the conversion of software to higher
level languages, and the audit and
update of documentation for consistency
with the guidelines issued; by the
National Bureau, of Standards.
[4] Approximate acquisition schedule.
(5) The proposed 800111811100 strategy
for meeting prujwteu ADP resource
needs-identified in the ADP plans
submitted pursuant to OMB Circular A—
(b) Information, in. the plan, wffl be
used by GSA in compiling estimated
Government-wide requirements and
developing acquisition programs Jo
assist agencies in meeting their needs in
an efficient and economic manner.
Specifications and purchase
descriptions describing Government
requirements sbaO be designed to
promote competition to the maximum
practicable extent from manufacturers*
leasing companies, third-party vendors,
and ADP services contractors.
Functional specifications maximize
competition and are the pieiuiied
method for expressing the user's
requirements (see FPR §§ 1-4.1102-12
and 1-44109-10J. Functional
specifications may be augmented with
equipment characteristics and'
performance criteria as necessary to
accurately reflect the user's needs (see
FPR 5 1-4J109-11J. K functional
specifications cannot be used, other*
types of specifications or purchase
lotions shall be used in the
following order of precedence;
(a) Equipment performance
specifications (see FPR § 1-4.1102-13);
(b) Software and equipment ping-to-
plug compatible functionally equivalent
purchase descriptions;
(c) Brand name or equal purchase
descriptions (see FPR ifi 1-1.307-4 and
1-1.307-5 (or. if applicable. DAR 1-
120&2)); or
(d) Specific make ami model
descriptions. (Use of specific make and
model purchase descriptions must be
justified— see FPR S§ 1-4-1102-& and 1-
§10t-3UOe COIIMI ston msnsgeinsin
and planning.
Conversion from one computer
architecture and operating system - -
software to another is a recurring and
costly activity. Frequently, moving a -
particular ADP system workload to a
noncouipatiole ADP system is so costly
as to be a mafor impediment to effective
competition by the noneompetibfe
offerer. However proper management of
an agency's software inventory and -
planning far ratine conversions will
reduce the risk and COST of conversion.
enhance competition, and improve the •
efficiency of ADP operations.
S 101-3U06-1
(a) Federal ADP managers and
contracting officers share the
responsibility for assuring that data
processing requirements are met at the
lowest overall coat, price and other
factors considered. This responsibility
extends to those actions necessary to
foster competition for subsequent
procurements. To achieve this objective.
122
-------
Federal Register / VoL 46, No. 2 / Monday, January 5, 1981 / Rules and Regulations
1217
ADP managers shall take necessary
action to minimize the coat of
conversion to future replacement ADP
systems. Although the configuration and
date of acquisition of the replacement
system may not be known, several steps
can and should be taken to reduce both
the risk and cost of conversion. •
(b) The following are examples of
management and planning actions that
ADP managers should take to facilitate
future conversions.
(1] Purge from the active inventory all
software and data bases not essential to
meet agency-needs.
(2) Identify relevant characteristics of
all application software: e.g.,
programming language, number of
source statements or lines of code. type.
and size of records and data Mies, and
security provisions.
(3) Use only software design and
documentation techniques that minimise
future software conversion to develop
new application software.
(4) Use Federal standard or other
ANSI standard high order languages to
the maximum practicable extent in
developing all new user application
~ software. Document agency files with-
the justification for using nonstandard
languages at the time the waiver is
granted.
(S) Avoid the use, where possible, of
implementor-defmed features and
vendor-supplied nonstandard
extensions in high order languages
compilers. Where it is necessary to use
these feature* and nonstandard
extensions, document agency files to
- support their use and retain the
documentation to manage the software
during its system life.
(6) Use to the maximum practicable
extent data base-management systems
(DBMS) supported by and that will run.
on equipment offered by multiple
manufacturers of different product lines
of ADPE: i.e.. other than plug-lo-plug
compatible equipment or designed to
conform to the Conference on Data
Systems Languages (CODASYL)
specifications. Where it ia not possible
to use such a DBMS, document agency
files to support this decision and retain
the documentation to manage the DBMS
its system life*
(7) Write application software
requiring software redesign in Federal
standard or other ANSI standard high
ooier languages unless the use of
assembly or other languages is clearly
justified on the basis of operational
requirements or demonstrable economy
and efficiency. Document-agency files
with the justification for using.
nonstandud languages at the time the
waiver is-granted and retain the
documentation to manage the
application software during its system
life.
(8) Rewrite application software
written in assembly or other non-
standard languages but not requiring
redesign in Federal standard or other
ANSI standard high order languages-to
foster competition for subsequent
procurements to the maximum
practicable extent.
(9) Review, revise, and update as
necessary documentation for all existing
applications to reduce the risk and cost
of future conversions.
(10) Evaluate all feasible alternative
courses of action for meeting agency
data processing needs before ADPE is
acquired on either a sole source, specific
make and model or compatible basis
since these types of purchase
descriptions limit the competitiveness of
the procurement
(c) The useful life of application
software is limited by changes in data
processing requirements, operating
system software, and equipment •
technology. Generally, the life
expectancy of this software, wilhqut
redesign or reprogramming, is in the
range of 5 to 10 years. Accordingly, the
upda'ting of application software for
these reasons must be reckoned with',
regardless of whether these programs
are converted from One ADP system
architecture to another. These
technology-updating activities should be
identified and managed separately from
conversion activities.
g101-3UOB-2 Software- conversion
Those specific agency actions taken to
reduce the risk andcost of conversion to
proposed replacements of ADP systems
(equipment or services) shall be
described in software conversion
studies submitted with agency
procurement requests (see FPR § J1-
4.1109-13 and 1-4.1109-14].
$,101-3UOr Determination of need an*
raqubwMntoamlyBls.
The acquisition of new or additional
ADP capabilities«hall be based on
mission needs that flow from program
requirements. These needs may be
expressed in the form of deficiencies in
existing capabilities; new or changed
program requirements, or opportunities •
for increased economy and efficiency. In
any event, the needs shall be supported
by a comprehensive requirements
analysis commensurate with the size
and complexity of the need. The ageqcy
shall consider the. following critical.
factors, as a minimum jjj the
requirements analysis
(a) Thejmbable improvement in
operational efficiency in meeting
program mission needs and the
anticipated economies that will be
realized.
(b) The present and projected
workload over the system life in terms *
of:
(1) Data entry and associated
communications support;
(2) Data baae(s) and data base
management;
(3) Data handling or transaction
processing by type and volume;
(4} Output needs and associated
communications support;
(5) Expandability requirements: and
(B) Privacy and security safeguards.
(c) The ADP functions that must be
performed to meet the mission need and
the cost/benefits that will accrue as a
result of this performance.
(d) The actions that have been or
could be taken to increase die capability
and productivity of the existing system.
where applicable.
(e) The agency components involved,
their physical location, operational /
constraints, and the relative priority of
the specific requirement within the
spectrum of total mission needs.
(0 Space-management considerations;
e.g.. heal dissipation, airflow.
temperature range, relative humidity.
energy conservation, including
coordination with building managers
and GSA (see FPMR $ 101-17.101-5).
(g) The feasibility of sharing, use of
excess Government-owned or -leased
ADPE. the off-loading of lower priority
applications, the use of Federal data
processing centers and GSA sources "of
supply, or the use of commercial ADP
' services.
g101-3&207-t Severabta ADP>
requirements* •
(a) WhenTthe very subject matter of a-
contract is for something other than the
procurement ofcomnierciaily available
ADP items or services but some of these
items or services-are to be delivered
under the contract, the acquisition of the
ADP items or services by the
Government contractor u not subject to
this subpart (see § 101-35.201).
However, to ensure maximum
practicable competition, ADP items or
services shall be severed from the
overall requirement when it is
operationally feasible 1o do so and the
action will promote economy and
efficiency; To meet these basic
objectives, agencies shall sever the
requirement for general purpose
commercially available ADPE and ADP
services when U is operationally
'When the need can be Mliified by augmenting
the inafalled ADPB tytitm. (ha requirement*
aailjrili should conwder the fecton In thii
paragraph (b) of I lOl-OUor. whera-appiicable.
123
-------
1218
Federal Register / VoL 40, No. 2 / Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
feasible to do so and this action will
promote economy, efficiency, and
maximum practicable competition (see
1 101-3&203-10). Severable action shall
be considered by an agency when:
(1) The ADPE or ADP service
requirement is or can be. identified as a
separate line item:
(2) The value of the ADP portion
exceeds $500,000;
(3) The items can be procured by the
Government and delivered to the
contractor as required by the production
schedule:
(4) Adequate price competition can be
achieved on the severed ADP portion
[see FPR i l-3.807-i(b](lj):
(S) The expected cost reduction will
exceed the added costs of acquisition;
and
(6) Providing the ADPE and/or ADP
services will not affect the contractor's
ability and responsibility to perform as-
required by the provisions of the
contract
(b) The decision to sever ADP
requirements shall be made before
soiicitiug offers. A Govemment-
furniahed property clause shall be
included in the solicitation document foe
the non-ADP items or service*
solicitation when the ADP items or
services-are severed. •
§ 1ftt-<3U08 DelMiirihattoit of system/
Kern Me.
(aj The Government system/item life
shall be established by the initial
acquiring agency aa a part of each
requirements analysis. This life shall be-
used Eh the evaluation to determine the
lowest overall cost offer and whether
purchase, lease to ownership, lease with
option to purchase, or straight lease is
the lowest coat method of acquisition lor
tbfiGovennnentThefoBovrnig.factai& -
shall be considered in* '
Government system/item life;
(1) The period of time- the system/
item(s). plus- any planned augmentation,
will satisfy the needs of the initial user*
(2) The rate at which technology is
expected to advance.
(3) The probability that support will
continue to be available beyond the
period of intended use by the initial
user. This support includes items suclT
as "*"«•««""""•• spare parts, software
support etc.
(4) The probability that the system/.
iteffl(s) m its "
" d~
configuration will be reused by another
coaaaonent within tba agency or another
Federal agency once the- equipment will
no- longer meet (he needs of the initial
user. The estimated number of months,
if any, of contemplated use by a
secondary user will be added to die
initial user's requirement to determine
the Government system/item life.
(b) If the acquiring agency cannot
predict reuse, either within that agency
or by another Federal agency, the initial
user's system/item life shall be the
Government system/item life.
J101-3&2M Comparative cost analysis,
A comparative cost analysis shall be
performed for each requirement to
determine which alternative will meet
the user's needs at the lowest overall
coat over the system/item life. The
alternatives to be considered shall
include but are not limited to the
following:
(a) Use of non-ADP resources to
satisfy the requirement
(b) Use of existing ADP facilities (e.g..
Federal data processing centers) and
resources on a shared basis.
(c) Use of commercial ADP services.
(d) Redesign of application programs.
using Federal or ANSI standard
language to the maximum practicable
extent
(e) Revision: of production schedule or
job stream to improve throughput
capability.
(f) Addition or change in working
shifts to increase capacity.
. (g)Augmentation-of installed ADPE
"by adding additional components to
increase data processing capacity.
(h) Upgrading.selected system
components, socn as adding additional
selector channels, memory, faster tape
or disk units, etc* in order to improve
abffitr.
(i) Replacing installed ADP system-
with a compatible system that will
handle the workload.
fj) Competitive replacement of the
installed ADP system throogb me of
functional specifications.
] 10t-38L710 GvaJuoltonofacqaisttfoiT
(a) Comparative cost analysis sealf-be
made to-determine the method of
acquisition that represents the lowest
overall coat over the system/!fem(s} life.
The alternatives mat mast be
considered wiD very, depending on the
syvtBB/ilam being acquired and the
requirement cf the initial i
sB of-ths wtonstrvcs set
forth be)ow.tvhtcb wiD meet the user's
needs* snail-be considered.
(1) Ahemstfv* aetbods of acquisition
forADPB.
(i) Purchase.
(ii) Lease to owi
(iii) Lease with option to purchase.
[iv\ Straight tease.
[2) Alternative methods of acquisition
for proprietary software.
(i) Perpetual license to use.
(ii) License to use for extended term
(i.e.. more than 12 months).
(iii) License to use on a monthly basis.
(3) Alternative methods of acquisition
for ADPE maintenance services.
(i) On-site maintenance capability.
(ii) On-catt maintenance.
(iii) Time and materials.
(4) Commercial ADP services.
(i) Short-term resources used.
(ii) Extended system life, resources
used or dedicated.
(b) The present value of money factor,
as set forth in OMB Circular A-94. shall
be included in comparative cost
analyses. The single discount rate
(currently 10 percent) specified in die
OMB Circular represents die
approximate loagrun opportunity cost of
capital in the private sector. Under this.
methodology, payments over time am
adjusted to reflect the present value of
these payments as of tfce'date of
contract award. All expanses-over the
system/item(s) life for equipment.
software. maintammi-g, other support.
and predetermined in-house expenses
for installation *""** operation must be
adjusted. •
{101-3&211 Least cost acquWMdrk.
(a) The method of acquisition that
represents the lowest overall system/
item(a).life cost to the Government, price
and other factors MiaiHamH. shall be
TftlflctnA subject to availability of funds*
If a purchase. long-term leaaeTor
anyimjKt (g, thy lowest
IMM M ownenblp plan*.
"overall coat-alternative and the proper
type of funds (03* aurctmsB money) are
not available. GSA (ADTS) shall be
contacted to determine if the ADP Fund
can be used for the acquisition (see GSA
Bulletin FPMR F-lOft, Subject: Use of
ADP Fund for equipment purchase).
(b) In some cases, lease may be the
lowest overall coat alternative based on
the system/itemls) life to the initial user;
whereas, purchase or a lease to
ownership plan may be the lowest
overall cost based on the- Government
system/ltemfs) life. When this condition
exists, ADTS shall be contacted to
determine if the ADP Fund can be used
to make the purchase. Equipment
purchased by the ADP Fund under these
conditions will be teased back to the
using agency at a price not to exceed the
vendor's lease cost ever the- hntial user's
system/ilemis) life. ADFB retained by
the using agency beyond the originally
established syatem/item(a) life shall be
subject to a new ADP Fund leasing
agreement >'
124
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 4ft No. 2 / Monday. January 5. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 1219
(c) In those cases where purchase
funds are not available but purchase is
in the best interest of the Government.
the method of acquisition which is most
advantageous to the Government and
for which funds are available shall be
selected.
§101-3&212 Assistance by GSA.
Assistance in any phase of the
management process covered by this
Subpart 101-35.2 may be oblained by
contacting the General Services
Administration (CPS), Washington. DC
20405.
PART 101-36—ADP MANAGEMENT
3. The table of contents for Part 101-
36 iB-changed by deleting and reserving
two subparts as follows:
Subpart 101-3M.[Reserved]
Subpart 101-38.15 [Reserved]
4. The provisions of Subparts 101-3614
and 101-36.15 are canceled and the
subparts are deleted and reserved, as
follows;
Subpart 101-36:4 (Reserved]
Subpart 101-38.15 [Reserved!
•Ray Kline,
Acting Administrator of General Services.
[FH Doe. n-OI Filed 1-3-W: Ma un|
125
-------
8.15 GSA Bulletin FPMP F-126: Abbreviated Forir
For Agency Requests For ADP Equipment and
Services
126
-------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
. WASHINGTON. O. C. 20408
Movember 4, 1980
GSA BULLETIN FPMR F-126
ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
TO: Heads of Federal agencies
SUBJECT: Agency requests for ADP equipment and services
1. Purpose. This bulletin announces an alternate informa-
tion submission method that Federal agencies may use when
requesting GSA review of an ADP equipment or service pro-
curement request. This bulletin does not revise existing
regulatory provisions. The primary purpose of this alternate
method is to reduce agency paperwork and the corresponding
time associated with review of these procurement requests by
GSA.
2. Effective date. December 1, 1930.
3. Expi-ration date. December 1, 1981.
4. Background. Federal agencies currently submit to GSA
agency procurement requests to obtain authorization to procure
ADP equipment and services. GSA grants these authorizations
following a review of accompanying documentation. The pur-
pose of this documentation is to provide evidence of satis-
factory agency acquisition practices in support of the
particular ADP procurement. The GSA review process has been
a source of irritation to Federal agencies because it is
considered cumbersome and time consuming.
The intent of this alternate information method is to- focus
attention on only those items that are clearly major consi-
derations in GSA's review of an agency ADP request. Agencies
will continue to follow the provisions of current Federal
regulations and the conditions stated in their individual
procurement authorization letters from GSA.
5. Agency actions. Any Federal agency may elect to use the
alternate documentation method outlined in attachment A of
this bulletin when submitting ADP equipment or service
requests to GSA. Aaencies should advise GSA in writing the
names of those officials, and their titles, who are authorized
to sign agency submissions under this method.
Attachment
127
-------
GSA Bulletin FPMR F-126 November 4, 1980
6. GSA action. GSA will review the information submitted under
this method in accordance with FPR 1-4.11 or FPMR 2rpl-35 and 36,
as appropriate, and authorize agencies to proceed v'dth the
acquisition, or GSA will make the procurement on behalf of the
agency (see FPR 1-4.1105-1). rfhen required, the information
submitted by an agency 'may also be' used by GSA for informing
congressional oversight committees of impending procurement
actions. At its discretion, GSA will conduct periodic reviews
of past agency procurement actions' authorized under this method
to (a) verify compliance with the authorization letter con-
ditions, '(b) assess its'procurement policies and directions
given to agencies, xand (c). identify agencies to whom greater
procurement authority-may be granted.
7. Information arid assistance. For information and assistance
contact the Automated.Data and Telecommunications Service "(ADTS):
General Services Administration (CPSR)
Washington', DC 20405
Telephone: FTS or local 566-1133
Commercial toll 202-566-1133
FRANK J i CARR '
Commissioner, Automated Data
and Telecommunications Service
6SA OC.01I004?«
128
-------
November 4, 1 90 GSA Bulletin FPMR F-126
Attachment A
Agency Request for ADP
Equipment or Services
Agency information
Provide agency name, address, and where equipment will be installed or
service will be performed. Provide names and telephone numbers of
appropriate technical and contracting officials.
Project title and description
Provide name or designation of agency system or service and description of
major system components or services that are to be added or changed.
Indicate date when the feasibility study was last completed and/or updated.
(On a sampling basis, GSA may request and review the feasibility study
before processing the agency procurement request.)
Procurement strategy
Provide brief synopsis of proposed procurement approach; i.e., competitive
or sole source — lease, purchase, or lease with option to purchase — all-
or none awards or item by item awards — firm fixed-price, etc.
Type of request Total cost System/item life
Check as appropriate Total estimated Estimated number of years
acquisition cost to be used by Federal
for system or item Government (FPR 1-4.
life (FPR 1-4. 1102-11)
1102-14)
- ADPE system or item
- ADPE system replacement/
augmentation
- Software
- Maintenance services
- TSP .
- ADP services
- Other ADP resources
129
-------
,GSA Bulletin FPMR F-12 November 4, 1980
Attachment A
Exception or deviation to regulations (FPR, FPMR)
Provide a. statement that the agency has reviewed and complied with all
applicable regulations, or list those deviations to the regulations that
apply to this request that cannot or will not be net by the agency.
Provided a brief explanation for each deviation from the regulations.
(See FFR 1-4.11 and TPMR 101-35 and 101-36, as amended, and current GSA
temporary regulations affecting ADP.)
Agency remarks
This space for additional information concerning any of the above items
or special conditions associated with this procurement; e.g., required
building construction/modification by GSA.
Aqency/GSA references
Relevant past GSA authorizations, meetings, telephone discussions, etc.
Agency signature official, title, date
2
130
-------
8.16 Source Evaluation and Selection Procedures
(Chapter 25, EPA Contracts Management
Manual)
131
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CHAPTER 25 - SOURCE EVALUATION AND
SELECTION PROCEDURES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MANUAL
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
PARAGRAPH
TITLES
Figure
Figure
25-1.
25-2.
25-3.
Figure
Figure 25-4.
Figure 25.5
Notice to Unacceptable Offerers
Notice to Offerers outside the
Competitive Range
Advanced Notice of Offer Selected
for Negotiations
Processing Sequence for Source
Evaluation and Selection
Proposal Technical Evaluation
PARAGRAPH
NUMBERS
Purpose 1
Applicability 2
Deviations and Exceptions 3
Policy 4
Conflicts of Interests 5
Disclosure of Information 6
Responsibilities and Duties 7
Reports 8
Functional Assignments for Evaluation and Selection 9
Procurement Request and Solicitation Preparation 10
Evaluation Criteria 11
Preproposal Conferences 12
Receipt and Distribution of Offers 13
Evaluation Procedures 14
Optional Scoring Procedure 15
Evaluation Considerations 16
Determination of the Conpetitive Range 17
Written or Oral Discussions 18
Best and Final Offer 19
Source Selection Decisions 20
Negotiations with the Source Selected 21
Award 22
Notifications to Unsuccessful Offerers 23
Debriefing 24
TH 27 (11/20/79)
ORIGINATOR: PM-214
CHAP 25
132
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
MANUAL
1. PURPOSE. This Chapter establishes policies and procedures for
the source evaluation and selection processes pertaining to: (1) the
procurement of personal property and nonpersonal services, as defined
in the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as
amended; and (2) major systems acquisition from non-Federal sources
by competitive negotiation, as set forth in Office of Management and
Budget Circular No. A-109.
2. APPLICABILITY.
a. The provisions of this Chapter apply Agencywide to all
competitive negotiated procurement actions in excess of $10,000
except architect-engineer services. For the selection and award
procedures pertaining to architect-engineer services see Federal
Procurement Regulations (FPR) Subpart 1-4.10 as implemented by
Environmental Protection Agency Procurement Regulations (EPPR)
Subpart 15-4.10.
b. Generally, the provisions of this Chapter also apply to the
procurement of automatic data processing equipment and services.
However, any special requirements placed by the General Services
Administration on a particular procurement action shall take
precedence if such requirements are in conflict with any provision of
this Chapter.
c. FPR l-3.805-l(a) sets forth in five succeeding subparagraphs
exceptions to the requirement that written or oral discussions shall
be conducted with all responsible offerers who submitted proposals
within a competitive range. The provisions of this Chapter need not
apply where an exception permitted by FPR 1-3.805-1(a)(1) through
(a)(5) is present. However, the specific exception at 1-3.805-1
(a)(5) regarding award without discussion based upon the existence of
adequate competition or accurate prior cost experience, does not
apply to a procurement which contemplates a cost reimbursement type
of contract.
d. The provisions of this Chapter do not apply to procurement
from a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC),
unless a FFRDC chooses to respond to a competitive solicitation which
otherwise requires application of these provisions.
TN 27 (11/20/79) CHAP 1
ORIGINATOR: PM-214 1 PAR 1
133
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
3. DEVIATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS. The Director, Procurement and
Contracts Management Division (PM-214), may authorize deviations or
exceptions to any of the provisions of this Chapter upon the receipt
of adequate justification (see EPPR 15-1.009-2).
4. POLICY.. It is EPA policy that source evaluation and selection
shall be conducted in accordance with consistent standards and
procedures that insure fair and impartial treatment of all offerers,
and further insure the selection of sources whose performance is
expected to best meet EPA minimum requirements or objectives at a
reasonable price or cost. Commensurate with this policy, it is
paramount that source evaluation and selection proceedings be
conducted in a manner designed to avoid any appearance of bias,
partiality, arbitrary or capricious behavior, inequitable treatment,
or undue influence.
5. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
a. The Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 3) prescribes the
high ethical standards of conduct required of each EPA employee,
including both regular and special Government employees in carrying
out their duties and responsibilities. Each EPA employee engaged in
source evaluation and selection is required to familiarize himself
with the provisions of Part 3 regarding conflicts of interest, and to
inform the Director or Chief of Contract Operations in writing if his
participation in the source evaluation and selection process could be
interpreted as a possible or apparent conflict of interest. Any EPA
employee who informs the Director or Chief of Contract Operations and
is determined to have a conflict of interest shall be relieved of
further duties in connection with the evaluation and selection
process, and a successor will be designated.
b. Only regular or special Government employees of EPA, or
where appropriate, other Federal Government agencies, shall
participate in the evaluation and selection process. Employees of
contractors shall not participate either formally or informally in
the evaluation and selection process.
134
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
6. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION. During the course of evaluation and
selection, personnel shall not reveal any information concerning the
evaluation to anyone who is not also participating in the same
evaluation proceedings, except as nay be required for internal
clearance or technical assistance. The right to information during
the evaluation process does not extend to the chain of supervision of
personnel engaged in the evaluation. However, nothing in this
procedure precludes reasonable status reports of activities to
persons having program or procurement responsibilities, on a
"need-to-know" basis, provided that no information relating to the
status or content of a specific proposal is disclosed.
7. RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES.
a. Head of the Procuring Activity. The Director, Procurement
and Contracts Management Division (PM-214), is the head of the
procuring activity (see FPR 1-1.206 and 41 CFR 15-1.206). Specific
functions of the head of the procuring activity in regard to source
evaluation and selection are to:
(1) Monitor the source evaluation and selection process;
(2) Provide guidance and direction where required; and
(3) Rule on requests for deviation and exceptions from the
policy and/or procedures prescribed herein.
b. Source Selection Official. The Source Selection Official
(SSO), is the official designated in accordance with paragraph 9 of
this Chapter to direct the source selection process. Duties of the
SSO are to:
(1) Appoint the Source Evaluation Board and chairperson;
(2) Appoint the Technical Evaluation Panel and Business
Evaluation Panel and chairperson;
(3) Approve the solicitation and the evaluation criteria
including any changes to either the solicitation or the evaluation
criteria which are to be made after the solicitation is issued;
(4) Monitor the source evaluation and selection process;
TN 27 3 CHAP 25
1V20/79 PAR 6
135
-------
MAMUAL 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
(5) Provide guidance and/or direction when required;
(6) Approve competitive range determinations;
(7) Select source(s) for negotiations; and
(8) Conduct formal debriefings or delegate the duty to the
procurement officer.
c. Source Evaluation Board. The Source Evaluation Board (SEE), is
appointed by the SSO, and is composed of personnel representing the
various functional and technical disciplines involved in a specific
procurement action. The membership consists of a chairperson, who is
responsible for all of the procedural and administrative aspects of the
SEE, and other specialists, e.g., technical, legal, contracting officer
or contract specialist, and financial, as may be deemed appropriate by
the SSO. In addition to the chairperson and other specialists, the Chair-
persons of the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), and Business Evaluation
Panel (BEP), are members of the SEB. It is the responsibility of the SEB
to present the results of the evaluation to the SSO.
d. Technical Evaluation Panel. The TEP is composed of personnel
including, but not limited to, the project officer and, for actions in
excess of $100,000, at least two additional members who are knowledgeable
of the technical aspects of the procurement action. Responsibilities of
the TEP are to participate in the coordination of the technical aspects
of evaluation criteria and statement of work for the solicitation, evaluate
offers, provide guidance to the contracting officer for the competitive
range determination, provide a comprehensive evaluation report to the
SEB, and prepare a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of each offer
for the Chairperson of the SEB to use in his report to the SSO.
e. Business Evaluation Panel. The BEP is composed of personnel
including, but not limited to, the contracting officer and/or contract
specialist, and a price and cost analyst. Responsibilities of the BEP are
to participate in the coordination of the business aspects of evaluation
criteria and statement of work for the solicitation, evaluate the business
and contractual aspects of the offerers' business proposals, consider other
factors including responsibility of the offerers, provide guidance to the
contracting officer for the competitive range determination, and prepare a
summary of findings, including strengths and weaknesses of each offer, and
recommendations for the use of the Chairperson of the SEB to use in his
report to the SSO.
CHAP 25 TN 2?
275 < U/20/79
136
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
f. Program Manager. The EPA program official at division, office,
or laboratory director level having overall responsibility for the
management of a program is usually the Chairperson of the SEE.
g. Project Officer. The project officer is usually the Chairperson
of the TEP and as such is responsible for recommending the TEP member-
ship for the approval of the SSO. He is designated by the program
manager, with the concurrence of the SSO, as the technical representative
for the procurement action.
h. Contracting Officer. This official is delegated the authority
to enter into and administer contracts and make related determinations
and findings. Delegations of contracting officer authority have been
made by the Administrator to positions in EPA and redelegated to
positions and individuals whose functions are to provide procurement
support (see Delegations Manual, Chapter 1, 1-1-A(2)).
i. Contract Specialist. This individual is assigned the responsi-
bility for the procurement action and for the accomplishment of the
administrative, duties necessary for and leading to a contract. Responsi-
bilities of the contract specialist include, but are not limited to,
preparing the solicitation document, arranging preproposal conferences,
conducting negotiations, insuring complete and accurate documentation of
the official contract file, and preparing the contractual instrument.
Generally, the contract specialist is also responsible for receiving,
safeguarding, distributing offers to the SEE, and, when so designated,
may be a member of the BEP.
j. Director or Chief of Contract Operations. The senior EPA
individual-classified in the GS-1102 series having assigned responsi-
bilities for the management and operations of the procurement activities
at a specific location, i.e., Washington, D.C.; Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina; and Cincinnati, Ohio. These individuals are also "chief
officers responsible for procurement at the contracting activity" (41
CFR 15-1.250).
k. Responsible Prospective Contractor. Subpart 1-1.12 of the FPR
requires that the contracting officer make an affirmative determination
that a prospective contractor is responsible within the standards set
forth in Section 1-1.1203-1 and 1-1.1203-2. No contract may be awarded
to any prospective contractor unless those standards have been met. (See
Section 1-1.702, Small Business Policies).
TN 27 CHAP 25
11/20/79 5 PAR 7
137
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
• CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
8.
a. Source Evaluation Board Report. The formal report prepared
by the SEE, which contains the evaluation standards (including the
evaluation criteria, specifications! and other special terms and
conditions of the solicitation), detailed narrative assessments of
each offer against these standards, numerical scores when used, and a
summary of facts and findings of significant strengths, weaknesses,
and risks of each offer. The SEB Report forms the 'basis for analysis
and selection by the SSO. Therefore, the SEB Report is not to
contain recommendations.
b. Technical Evaluation Panel Report. The formal narrative
report prepared by the TEP for submission to the SEB. This report is
the basis for a major portion of the SEB report to the SSO. It
includes the detailed scoring, and a summary of facts and findings of
significant strengths, weaknesses, and risks associated with each
offer. The report must be in sufficient detail to permit a
determination of acceptable offers, justify the relative ranking of
offers, and to adequately advise, through debriefing sessions, those
offerers who did not receive an award of the reason their offers were
not accepted. However, see paragraph 15 regarding the use of
simplified methods for actions not in excess of $100,000. Technical
evaluation is a continuing process during source evaluation and
selection.
c. Business Evaluation Panel Report.
(1) The formal narrative report prepared by the BEP for
submission to the SEB. This report is the basis for a portion of the
SEB report to the SSO. It includes the appropriate consideration,
analysis, and findings concerning the following elements of each
technical acceptable offerer's business and management proposal:
(a) Reasonableness of price or estimated cost in
relation to the requirement;
(b) Investigation and analysis of unrealistically low
or high cost elements;
(c) Evaluation of the proposed management structure to
be utilized for performance;
11/20/79
138
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
(d) Indirect cost management;
(e) Analysis of manhours, materials, and, if
applicable, such elements as computer time, subcontractors,
consultants, and travel;
(f) Subcontracting program as it relates to small
business, labor surplus area concerns, and minority business
enterprises; and
(g) Record of performance under prior EPA contracts as
it relates to timely performance, history of cost control, requests
for changes, and quality of the end product which can be obtained
from the Contractor Performance Evaluations System. Where the
offerer is known to have performed contracts with other Government
agencies for comparable work, those agencies should be contacted for
a record of past performance.
(2) Business evaluation is a continuing function during the
evaluation and selection process. The business evaluation includes
some form of price or cost analysis for all procurement actions.
Except for those offerers which after initial technical evaluation
are found to be clearly unacceptable, all procurement actions require
a preliminary analytical cost evalutaion report (PACER) by the
negotiator or contracting officer so that proper attention can be
given to the effect of price or cost on the competitive range
decision. After the competitive range is determined, a full price or
Cost Analysis Report (CAR), shall normally be initiated of all
offerers determined to be in the competitive range. Procurement
actions expected to exceed $100,000 require a review and appropriate
analysis by the EPA cost advisory office. The CAR should normally be
available to the SSO prior to selection of the source for final
negotiations. However, when the CAR is not available prior to source
selection, it shall be available not later than the time when final
negotiation with the source selected occurs.
(3) The Business Evaluation Report shall include an
evaluation of those business elements submitted with each proposal
which could lead to a determination of nonresponsibility by the
contracting officer. In the absence of evidence that any of the
offerers could be considered nonresponsible, the BEP Report shall
include a statement that allows the contracting officer to
affirmatively determine responsibility.
TH 27 7 CIAP 25
11/20/79 PAR 8
139
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
(4) Generally, business proposals are not susceptible to the
application of a numerical scoring system. However, the BEP Report should
reflect descriptive ratings for each significant element of the proposal
that has been analyzed. The descriptive ratings to be used are a "minus,"
"plus," or "check," an are applicable under the following conditions:
(a) "Minus" means that the particular element is lacking to
such a degree that contract performance may be impaired;
(b) "Plus" means that the particular element is superior to
such an extent that contract performance is likely to be enhanced; and
(c) "Check" means that the particular element neither exceeds
nor falls below what is considered essential for successful contract per-
formance .
d. Source Selection Decision Report. The Source Selection Decision
Report is prepared by, or under the direction of, the SSO. It reflects
the analysis made by the SSO of the SCB Report, the TEP Report, and the
BEP Report. The report fully documents the rationale of the SSO in
arriving at the decision to select a particular source, or sources, for
negotiation.
9. FUNCTIONAL ASSIGNMENTS FOR EVALUATION AND SELECTION. The following
conditions are applicable to the appointment or designation of the SSO,
SEB, TEP, and BEP and their functional duties with respect to procurement
actions of the dollar values indicated. For the purpose of establishing
a SEB, dollar value shall mean the total estimated cost/price of the
total planned requirements of any resulting contract.
a. In Excess of $5,000,000;
(1) SSO - The Head of the Procuring Activity (see 7a);
(2) SEB Chairperson - Program Manager (see If);
(3) SEB Members - Chairperson of the TEP and BEP. (Such other
specialists may be appointed'by the SEB Chairperson as deemed appropriate
for the particular procurement action) (see 7c);
(4) TEP Chairperson - Project Officer (see 7d); and
(5) BEP Chairperson - Contracting Officer (see 7e).
map 9^ TN 27
5? B 8 "/2Q/79
140
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
b. In Excess of $2,000,000 But Not Exceeding $5,000,000;
(1) SSO - Director or Chief of Contract Operations (see 7j);
(2) SEB Chairperson - Program Manager (see 7f);
(3) SEB Members - Chairperson of the TEP and BEP. (Such other
specialists excluding members of the TEP and BEP may be appointed by the
SEB Chairperson as deemed appropriate for the particular procurement
action) (see 7c);
(4) TEP Chairperson - Project Officer (see 7d); and
(5) BEP Chairperson - Either the Contracting Officer (see 7h) or
the Contract Specialist (see 7i) as determined by the Contracting Officer.
c. In Excess of $10,000 But Not Exceeding $2,000,000;
(1) SSO - Contracting Officer (see 7h);
(2) SEB Chairperson - Generally, a functional SEB is not
appointed for procurement actions of these dollar values; therefore,
the project officer and contract specialist shall perform those duties
normally associated with the SEB Chairperson and SEB Members;
(3) SEB Members - None;
(4) TEP - The normal functions of the TEP are performed by the
project officer and, for actions in excess of $100,000, at least two
additional members who are knowledgeable of the technical aspects of the
procurement action.
(5) BEP - The normal functions of the BEP are performed by the
contract specialist and the price and cost analyst.
10. PROCUREMENT REQUEST AND SOLICITATION PREPARATION.
a. Procurement Request. Chapter 1, Procurement Request/Requisition
and Rationale Document, Contracts Management Manual, prescribes policies
and procedures for the use of EPA Form 1900-8, Procurement Request/ Requi-
sition, and establishes the documentation which must accompany the form.
Chapter 1, subparagraph 6c(10) sets forth the requirement for inclusion
of the evaluation criteria with EPA Form 1900-8.
25
141
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
b. Presolicitation.
(1) The effectiveness of the source selection process
depends to a large extent on the content and quality of the
solicitation document. It is ijnportant at this stage in the
procurement action that the SEB, TEP, and BEP are appointed and
become actively associated with the contracting officer, or contract
specialist, in the preparation of the solicitation. Therefore, the
SEB and panels shall be appointed where the procurement action is in
excess of $2,000,000.
(2) For those procurement actions not in excess of
$2,000,000, the contracting officer or contract specialist shall
thoroughly review the solicitation document for consistency with law,
policy, and regulations. Other matters to be addressed include, type
of contract contemplated, planned contractual provisions, quantities,
schedules, completeness, and specification and data requirements.
The contracting officer shall insure that both management and
technical data requirements have been similarly evaluated to
eliminate nonessential or unduly restrictive requirements.
(3) Irrespective of the dollar value of the procurement
action, the solicitation document including the evaluation criteria
shall be reviewed and approved by the SSO prior to release to the
public. Proposed amendments of the solicitation shall be similarly
reviewed and approved prior to release. Note, however, that the
requirement for prior review and approval by the SSO is in addition
to the requirement (see Chapter 17 of this Manual) for review and
approval by the head of the procuring activity at the dollar value
indicated. The latter review can be accomplished concurrent with
issuance of the solicitation.
11. EVALUATION CRITERIA.
a. Although the initiator of EPA Form 1900-8, Procurement
Request/Requisition, is responsible for the development of the
evaluation criteria, the TEP and BEP are additionally responsible for
insuring that the evaluation criteria are adequately stated and
applicable to the procurement action.
b. Evaluation criteria must be developed on a case-by-case
basis after taking into~consideration each of the salient features of
the specific procurement action.
CHAP 25 10 TN 27
PAR 10 11/20/79
142
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE 'EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
c. All offerers must be able to readily determine from an
examination of the criteria included in the solicitation, the basis
upon which their offers will be evaluated. In order to accomplish
this, the evaluation criteria shall be set forth in elements and when
appropriate, may be further defined in subelements. The importance
of each element and subelement must be indicated. This can be
accomplished by listing them in a relative order of importance, or by
assigning weights to each element and to each subelement.
d. The decision to use evaluation criteria which assigns
specific weights rests in the SSO. Depending upor the procurement
action, weights may be assigned to each major element of the
evaluation criteria. It is not generally necessary to assign weights
to evaluation criteria subelements, however, assignment of weights to
subelements is not precluded. When weights are not used, the
relative order of importance of the criteria must be indicated.
e. In addition to the technical evaluation criteria, the
solicitation shall indicate the importance of price or cost in the
award decision and to the extent that there 'are other factors which
may influence the award decision and which are foreseen at the time
the solicitation is issued, such other factors shall be listed in the
solicitation. Both price or cost and other factors are elements for
the SSO to consider in selecting the source of award. The degree of
importance of price or cost and other factors depends upon the
particular procurement. Technical superiority, business/management
capability, and cost aspects all may be equally important in a given
procurement, while in another procurement one or two may have limited
importance.
12. PREPROPOSAL CONFERENCES. Preproposal conferences are an
important part of the solicitation process and shall be conducted in
a fair and impartial manner that will not give any prospective
offerer an unfair competitive advantage over another. The
determination to conduct a preproposal conference may be made by the
SSO or the contracting officer, under the following conditions:
a. Prior to Issuance of the Solicitation. Where it is
determined that a preproposal conference would be advantageous to the
Government and prospective offerers in order to:
(1) Clarify or explain complex specifications, statement of
work, or proposed contractual provisions, e.g., patent rights, and
data requirements;
™ 27 n CIA? 25
11/20/79 PAR 11
143
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
(2) Discuss or enphasize the importance of any
qualification requirements that have been set forth in the synopsis
and solicitation, e.g., offerers' capabilities, experience,
facilities, and resources that are required to perform the statement
of work;
(3) Disclose any ambiguities, inconsistencies, and gaps
within or between the solicitation schedule, statement of work,
specifications, and evaluation criteria; and
(4) Provide additional background material to prospective
offerers, e.g., reports or other documents that are too voluminous to
include with the solicitation, a site tour, or visits to the place of
performance. Normally, the solicitation should state when and where
the preproposal conference will be held.
b. After Issuance of the Solicitation. It may become necessary
to conduct a preproposal conference even though the solicitation does
not provide for one. A notice shall be given to all prospective
offerers who have received the solicitation and shall be in such form
as the SSO, or contracting officer, may determine, i.e., an amendment
to the solicitation or letter notice. The following circumstances
are indicative that a preproposal conference is desirable:
(1) Numerous questions of substantive matters regarding the
solicitation have been directed to the contracting officer, contract
specialist, or project officer;
(2) An important segment of industry requests the
conference; or
(3) Continuing review of the technical and business aspects
of the solicitation by EPA personnel reveals matters which should be
clarified, but does not indicate that a substantive change to the
solicitation is necessary.
c. Post Conference Actions. The actions to be taken following
a preproposal conference are dependent upon several factors and are
largely judgmental.
(1) In those cases where a transcript (either based upon
tape or stenographic notes) has been prepared, the transcript may be
either furnished to all prospective offerers or all prospective
offerers may be notified of its availability upon request, provided
that, nothing in the transcript in any way modifies the solicitation; or
CHAP 25 12TN 27
PAR 12 11/20/79
144
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
SOrjRCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
(2) Where the transcript modifies the solicitation, an amend-
ment of the solicitation shall be prepared and furnished to all
prospective offerers.
13. RECEIPT AND DISTRIBUTION OF OFFERS. The integrity and consequent
effectiveness of the source evaluation and selection process is depen-
dent upon the care that must be exercised in the receipt and subsequent
handling of offers. Offerers' identities, offer contents, and prices
shall be treated with the utmost discretion to avoid compromising the
evaluation results or giving any offerer an unfair competitive advantage
over other offerers. The contracting officer is the sole point of con-
tact during the entire competitive process. Any questions regarding
the receipt and distribution of offers, status of the proceedings, or
other natters shall be referred to the contracting officer. The receipt
and distribution of offers shall be governed by the following minimum
standards:
a. Receipt. Only those offers which are received on or before the
time and date set forth in the solicitation shall be considered for
award, unless the late receipt is due to one of the conditions described
in the "Late Proposals, Modifications of Proposals, and Withdrawals of
Proposals" provision of the solicitation (see FPR 1-3.802-1).
b. Security Measures. The Director or Chief of Contract Operations
is responsible for insuring that as offers are received they are promptly
recorded and properly safeguarded to prevent unauthorized disclosures.
As a minimum, after expiration of the deadline for receipt of proposals,
the contract specialist will serialize all proposal copies and provide
the TEP Chairperson a sufficient number of copies of the technical
proposal only for distribution to members of the TEP. The TEP Chair-
person is responsible for maintaining a log of this distribution. The
contract specialist will assure that after evaluation of proposals, all
copies not required for contract monitoring are destroyed. The contract
specialist will distribute copies of the Business/Cost Proposals to
members of the BEP, maintain a log of this distribution, and assure
that all but two copies are destroyed upon contract award. A single
copy of each proposal received will be included in the official contract
file and in the price/cost analysis file.
TN
n/20/79 13
12
145
-------
MANUAL CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
c. Distribution of Offers.
(1) Each EPA solicitation sets forth a requirement that offerers
shall submit the technical and business proposals as separate and complete
in themselves so that evaluation of each may be accomplished concurrently
and independently. If an offeror fails to submit separate technical and
business proposals as prescribed by the solicitation, the contracting
officer shall determine whether the offeror should be allowed to correct
this imperfection and if it would be prejudicial to other offerers or to
EPA. If it is determined not to be prejudicial, the offer may be
corrected to separate the technical and business proposals. It is
imperative that this separation be maintained throughout the evaluation
process to insure that the technical evaluation is conducted solely on
the technical proposal and is not in any way influenced by price or cost
considerations. Therefore, promptly following the time and date set for
the receipt of offers, the contract specialist, or other individual who
has been designated by the Director or Chief of Contract Operations,
shall distribute the technical and business portions to:
(a) The TEP and BEP, respectively, where the procurement
action is in excess of $100,000; or
(b) The project officer (technical portion only) and
contracting officer, or contract specialist when so designated, and the
price analyst (business portion only), where the procurement action is
$100,000 or less. The contract specialist, or other designated individual,
shall maintain a record, i.e., log of the offers received, furnish a copy
of this record to the recipients of the offers, and obtain a receipt, if
deemed appropriate. Recipients shall be advised of the requirements for
maintaining the technical and business proposals as separate entities and
of the requirements regarding the disclosure of information contained in
the offers (see 6).
(2) In those cases where offerers have been instructed to
submit their technical offers to a location other than the
procurement activity, the individual at that location must be
designated to receive, record, and distribute offers in the same
manner as prescribed for the contract specialist. The original copy
of each offer received shall be retained by the contract specialist,
pending the completion of the evaluation process, as the offical
CHAP 25 TN 27
PAR 13 14 1V20/79
146
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
file copy. This original copy and any modification thereto shall
became a part of the official contract file after award. Concurrent
with the distribution of the proposals, the contract specialist shall
advise the evaluators when the evaluation must be completed and the
evaluation reports are to be submitted to the SEB or, when the
procurement action is $2,000,000 or less, to the SSO.
14. EVALUATION PROCEDURES. This paragraph expands on the procedures
governing the technical and business evaluation of offers and
prescribes the method of scoring that shall be used in determining
the relative ranking of offers.
a. Initial Review. Technical proposal shall be reviewed
promptly after the time and date for the receipt of offers as set out
in the solicitation. The purpose of this review is to determine if
any of the offers are so technically deficient as to conclusively
remove them from further consideration. Either the contracting
officer, project officer, the Chairperson of the TEP, or the contract
specialist in conjunction with each other, shall make this initial
review. A decision to remove an offerer from further consideration
based upon an initial review of offers shall be made by the SSO.
Some examples of technically deficient offers are: The offerer is
offering equipment instead of the study called for in the
solicitation, the technical approach will clearly not accomplish the
desired results, the offer contains an approach or methodology that
has previously been found to be unworkable, or the offer is
contingent upon conditions which EPA cannot meet without violating
statutes or regulations. The removal of an offer from further
consideration is a very serious matter which may have an adverse
impact upon EPA; consequently, if any reasonable doubt exists
regarding the offer it shall be included for complete evaluation,
scoring, and ranking.
b. Scoring Plan. The scoring of offerers must be done through
the application of a predetermined scoring plan consisting of
numerical values. These values are applied against the weight
assigned to each subelement of the evaluation criteria set forth in
the solicitation. The values are on a scale of zero through five;
consequently, each value, except zero, represents 20 percent of the
maximum rating that a subelement may receive. For example, an
assigned value of four means that within a particular subelement the
offer has been evaluated and found to contain 80 percent of the
elements of the scoring plan. The following scoring plan shall be
used in conjunction with numerical weights to arrive at scores for
each element and subelement.
™ 2715CHAP 25
1V20/79 PAR 13
147
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
SCORING PLAN
Descriptive Statement.
Not addressed.
1 Addressed but totally deficient in management ability;
engineering or scientific judgment; lack of competence or
inventiveness, to the degree that the deficiency cannot be
corrected by negotiations subsequent to selection.
2a Addressed but deficient in management ability; engineering
or scientific judgment; lack of competence or inventiveness,
to the degree that the deficiency may be corrected by
negotiations subsequent to selection.
2b Appears to be deficient; however, clarification or
substantiation is required, and final scores will be
determined subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
3 Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
4 Good; has some superior features.
5 Generally superior in most features.
The relationship of the scoring plan to written or oral discussion
and to subsequent negotiations is as follows:
, (1) Value of "0," "1," or "2an - The element or subelement
clearly is deficient and is not to be questioned or discussed during
written or oral discussions. Such values are solely for the purposes
of scoring, ranking, and determination of the competitive range. If,
however, the offer attains an overall score, because of high scores
in some elements which offset low scores in other elements, that
places it in a sufficiently high position to be selected for
negotiations, the offerer shall be allowed to correct those
deficiencies during final negotiations.
CHAP 25 16 TN 27
PAR 14 11/20/79
148
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
(2) Value of "2b" - The element or subelement contains
uncertainties (see page 24 definition of "uncertainties") which must
be clarified or substantiated before the offer is fully understood.
Such uncertainties are to be resolved during written or oral
discussions, often called'interrogatories, and the offer is to be
given a final score that is based on the offerer's clarifications.
(3) Values of "3," "4," or "5" - The element or subelement
is fully understood and there is no need for clarification by the
offerer. However, discussions involving any such elements or
subelements are not precluded.
c. Scoring System. The SEE, or contracting officer in the case
of procurement actions not in excess of $2,000,000, shall prepare a
scoring system for evaluating each offer against each evaluation
criterion set forth in the solicitation. The scoring system shall
consist of the scoring plan (see subparagraph 14.b) and numerical
weights assigned to each element and subelement of the evaluation
criteria. The numerical weights assigned must coincide with the
relative importance of each evaluation criterion element and
subelement. For example, if the solicitation stated that the first
criterion was twice as important as each of the remaining three, then
the scoring system should reflect this by providing for a maximum
numerical weight of 200 points for this element of the offer/ and 100
points for the remaining three elements. When the scoring system
contains subelements, particular attention must be given to
maintaining the relative importance of each subelement to the total
element. The scoring system shall be developed prior to any
comprehensive review of offers, and, once adopted, shall be applied
without change throughout the entire evaluation. In scoring offers,
a numerical value of the scoring plan is applied to each numerical
weight in order to arrive at a score for that particular element or
subelement. The sum of these scores is the overall score attained by
the offer. The following example is an outline of a typical scoring
system showing the assignment of numerical weights, the application
of the scoring plan, the derivation of individual scores for each
element and subelement, and the overall score to be used in ranking
the offers.
TN *i 17 CHAP 25
H/20/79 PAR 14
149
-------
MANUAL
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
TECHNICAL EVALUATION SCORING SYSTEM
Evaluation Criteria Weight
I. Adequacy of Technical Proposal 200
a. Literature search and
investigation methodology 40
b. Proposed sources of
information 40
c. Plan for assessing the value
of each publication 40
d. Correlation of literature
to economic aspects 40
e. Presentation of findings 40
II. Project Management 100
a. Previous experience the
project manager has had
in this type of effort 25
b. Company resources available
to the project manager 25
c. Proposed subcontracting
effort in connection with
obtaining additional resources 25
d. Project management
organization and plan 25
III. Personnel Qualifications 100
a. Technical experience of
principal project staff related
to the project performance 35
Numerical Scoring Individual
Plan
3
2b
5
4
2a
3
5
Scores
128
24
16
40
32
16
55
15
25
15
62
28
CHAP 25
PAR 14
18
TH 27
11/20/79
150
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
b. Educational qualifications
related to the project
performance 35 4 28
c. Qualification of
consultants 30 1 6
Total Score 245
The application of the principles set forth in the scoring plan to
the above sample will result in the following:
(1) Item I.b, Proposed sources of information must be
discussed with the offerer and the element appropriately rescored.
If the clarification offered is such that a rescoring is not
appropriate, the value and score will remain as initially determined;
(2) Item I.e, Presentation of findings is not to be
discussed, but the offerer shall be allowed to correct his offer if
he is selected for negotiations because of other factors that have
resulted in the attainment of a high rank;
(3) Item II.c. Proposed subcontracting effort in connection
with obtaining additional resources; and
(4) -Item III.c, Qualifications of consultants shall be
treated in the same manner under the same circumstances set forth in
(2) above.
d. Evaluation Guidelines. The evaluation of offers requires
the exercise of careful judgment on the part of each evaluator.
Offers must be carefully read and analyzed before the scoring plan is
applied to any element or subelement. Evaluators should consider the
following when analyzing offers:
(1) Avoid "reading into" or "reading out of" any portion of
the offer, a meaning other than the exact language appearing in the
offer;
(2) Avoid the tendency to interpret the meaning of the
offerer's writing;
™" _" CHAP25
1V20/79 PAR M
151
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
(3) Avoid any infusion of personal knowledge concerning the
offerer?
(4) Recognize that the assignment of a score to an element
or subelement is subjective and based upon judgment;
(5) Recognize that no two individuals may assign the same
numerical score to an element or subelement;
(6) Recognize ambiguities, inconsistencies, errors,
omissions, irregularities, and deficiencies that can affect scoring;
(7) Recognize that offerers often use "catch phrases,"
"buzz words," and semi-legalistic phraseology which may not indicate
a thorough understanding of the solicitation;
(8) Recognize the quality of substance and do not be
influenced by form, format, or method of presentation;
(9) Recognize flattery on the part of the offerer; and
(10) Avoid forming "first impressions" of an offer that
might tend to influence the score to be assigned.
e. Ranking. The assignment of numerical scores to an offer
determines the relative rank of that offer with respect to other
offers. While the use of predetermined scores as a cutoff for the
establishment of the competitive range is prohibited, the scoring and
relative rank of offerers does influence this determination
materially. This is particularly true when an offer, or group of
offers, falls significantly below the lowest score attained by the
higher ranking offers. It is the responsibility of the SEE
Chairperson, or the Project Officer for procurement of less than
$2,000,000, to develop the overall ranking. This may involve
discussions between evaluators to understand conflicting views. The
final overall ranking is the responsibility of the SEB Chairperson.
CHAP 25 20 TN 27
PAR 14 11/20/79
152
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
15. OPTIONAL SCORING PROCEDURE. A combined checklist-scoring system
is authorized for use where procurement actions not in excess of
$100,000 are involved, and where requests for proposals are not
expected to result in offers which are complex enough to require
extensive evaluation. A suggested format and minimum number of
headings of a combined checklist-scoring system appears as Figure 25-5.
Both the format and major headings may be modified to accommodate the
particular circumstances and evaluation criteria of a specific
request for proposals. In all circumstances, the format and heading
shall be compatible with the evaluation criteria.
16. EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS.
a. Responsibility Standards. In addition to the relative
technical ranking of offers and the evaluation of price or cost,
consideration must be given to an offerer's responsibility in terms
of standards set forth in the Federal Procurement Regulations (FPR)
(see 41 CFR 1-1.1203).
b. Other Influencing Factors. Also, in addition to the
relative technical ranking of offers and the evaluation of price or
cost, consideration must be given to other factors contained in the
solicitation which may influence the selection decision. Normally
these other factors will be used as the discriminating element for
determining the selection of a source between two otherwise
substantially equal offerers.
c. Distinction Between Responsibility Standards and Influencing
Factors. Basically, the difference between responsibility standards
and influencing factors is that for responsibility standards the
contracting officer may make a determination of nonresponsibility
(not meeting a minimum standard) based on the criteria set forth in
41 CFR 1-1.1203 while influencing factors identified in the Request
for Proposals may be evaluated based on experience or information not
contained in the contractor's proposal. Influencing factors will be
part of the SSO's selection decision. An example of an influencing
factor would be the relative strength of the offerer's small business
subcontracting program.
TN 27 21 CL",P 25
H/20/79 PAR 15
153
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
17. DETERMINATION OF THE COMPETITIVE RANGE. Determination of the
competitive range is not treated in depth by the FPR (see 1-3.805-1
(a)), which states in part "...a competitive range, price, and other
factors considered, except..." This should not be interpreted that
price is the primary consideration and that other factors are
secondary. Almost all EPA procurement actions, to which this Chapter
applies, involve other factors which are of greater importance than
the price or estimated cost proposed. Accordingly, determination of
the competitive range shall be made only after evaluation of all
offers received and careful consideration of any possible trade offs
as follows:
a. Technical Evaluation. While the attainment of a
particularly high score would seem to indicate that an offer should
be considered within the competitive range, upon consideration of the
price offered, it may not be practicable to trade off the superior
technical aspects of the offer against a significantly higher price.
Generally, the attainment of a high technical evaluation score in
itself need not be sufficient basis for a determination that the
offer is within the conpetitive range. Conversely, an offer with a
lower technical evaluation may meet the minimum requirements of the
solicitation and offer a price that should be given further
consideration.
b. Business Evaluation. The business evaluation of offers is
an essential element in determining the competitive range, and is of
particular significance where several offers have received scores
that are close in numerical value as a result of the technical
evaluation. In such cases, the business evaluation may be the
determining factor in arriving at the competitive range. Similarly,
standards and factors set forth in paragraph 16 may be of such
importance that the offer cannot be reasonably determined to be
within the competitive range.
c. Determination and Documentation. The contracting officer
shall make the determination of the competitive range with the
subsequent approval by the SSO. As with the preceding discussions
regarding evaluations, no stringent rules can, or should be applied
in determining the competitive range, nor can a mathematical formula
be devised. Where there is reasonable doubt regarding the inclusion
of a particular offer within the competitive range, that doubt should
be resolved in favor of inclusion. Because the determination of the
CHAP 25 22 TN 27
PAR 17 11/20/79
154
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
competitive range is based on informed judgment and is complex in
nature, all such determinations must be completly documented to set
forth the rationale supporting the determination. When the
procurement action is expected to exceed $5,000,000 i.e., where the
SSO is the head of the procuring activity, a formal briefing of the
SSO by the SEE is required. This requirement may be waived by the
SSO if in his judgment the briefing is not necessary.
d. Example. The following example is furnished for guidance in
determining the competitive range based on the technical and business
evaluations of a group of offers:
Offeror Technical Evaluation Score Cost/Price
A Co. 330 $250,000
B Inc. 325 175,000
K Co. 275 145,000
D Co. 245 150,000
C Co. 200 115,000
G Co. 125 92,000
(1) G Co., while offering the lowest price/cost, has
submitted an offer that is seriously lacking in essential qualities.
A review of the scoring will show several essential qualities to have
been scored as "0," "1," or "2a";
(2) A Co., while attaining the highest technical score, has
offered a price/cost that is unreasonable for the effort required. If
an analysis of the business proposal shows that several elements of
price or cost are unusually high, but may be susceptible to downward
revision, the offer may be included in the competitive ranqe;
however, if those circumstances do not exist, the offer may safely be
considered to be outside the competitive range because of price/cost;
(3) C Co. has attained a score which represents only 50
percent of the essential qualities desired. This is also reflected
in the business proposal. The offer should not be considered within
the competitive range; and
(4) The offers of B Inc., K Co., and D Co., are close with
respect to both the technical evaluation and price/cost offered.
Therefore, these three offers should be within the competitive range
and depending upon the circumstances incident to the much higher
price, A Co. may also be included.
™ 27 23 CIAP 25
1V20/79 PAR 17
155
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
18. WRITTEN OR ORAL DISCUSSIONS.
a. Background. Public Law 87-653, commonly known as the Truth
in Negotiations Act, amended 10 U.S.C. 2304(g), require written or
oral discussions in negotiated procurements with all responsible
offerers who submit proposals within a competitive range. While this
Act did not apply to those agencies subject to the Federal Property
and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended, the
Administrator of General Services has applied the same provision to
civilian executive agencies in the interest of uniformity. This
provision is set forth in FPR 1-3.805-1(a).
b. Purpose. The FPR provides guidance as bo the purpose of
conducting discussions by the statement contained in 1-3.804 which
is — "Oral discussions or written communications shall be conducted
with offerers to the extent necessary to resolve uncertainties
relating to the purchase of the price to be paid." By interpretation,
the purposes of these discussions are to:
(1) Provide offerers an opportunity to further explain
their offers;
(2) Afford the contracting officer an opportunity to
understand fully what is being offsred;
(3) Afford the parties an opportunity to resolve
uncertainties regarding price, cost, performance, contract terms, and
conditions; and
(4) Resolve minor informalities in offers, e.g., incomplete
representations and certifications, and incomplete cost or pricing
information.
c. Uncertainties. An uncertainty is described as any part of an
offer which is unclear in meaning and requires substantiation for a
technical approach or solution or for a cost estimate.
d. Deficiencies. A deficiency is any portion of an offer that
lacks some necessary quality or element such that it does not address
the minimum requirements as stated in the solicitation. A deficiency,
as distinguished from an uncertainty, is any part of an offer which
clearly indicates an insufficiency in the offerer's management
abilities, engineering of scientific judgment, or lack of competence
or inventiveness in preparing the proposal.
CHAP 25 24 TN 27
PAR 18 11/20/79
156
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25 '
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
e. Limitations. Careful judgment in determining the extent of
discussions must be exercised. Discussions with each offerer must be
confined to those areas of the offer that have been identified as
containing "uncertainties" as defined in subparagraph c. There must
be a scrupulous avoidance of disclosure of technical information,
ideas, or cost data from any other offerer. No indication shall be
given to any offerer of a price which nust be met or bettered to
obtain further consideration since such practice constitutes an
auction technique. On the other hand, this does not prohibit
pointing out price or cost elements that do not appear to be
justified, or encouraging offerers to put forward their most favorable
price proposals, but in so doing, the price elements of any other
offerer nust not be discussed, disclosed, or compared. It is of
paramount importance that discussions shall not be extended into the
identification and correction of proposal "deficiencies" as defined
in subparagraph d. It is also important that when discussions are
held with one offerer, they most be held with all offerers within the
competitive range.
19. BEST AND FINAL OFFER.
a. Notification. All offerers included in the competitive
range shall be notified at the conclusion of written or oral
discussions of the opportunity to submit a revised proposal. A final
common cut off date, in accordance with 41 CFR 1-3.805-1(5} which
allows a reasonable opportunity for submission of final written
offers, nust be established. The notification must include
information to the effect that discussions are being concluded;
offerers are being asked for the "best and final" offer (which can be
a confirmation of a prior offer, but should be explicitly stated as a
final offer); and the confirmation or revised final offer must be
received by the date specified. When contracting officers call for
the "best and final" offer, offerers should be cautioned against
submitting unsupported changes in their former offers.
b. Receipt. Any "best and final'• offer received after the
established final common cut off date must thereafter be handled as
•late" in accordance with FPR 1-3.802-1.
c. Evaluation. "Best and final" offers shall be subject to a
final evaluation (price or cost, technical, and other salient
factors) to the extent considered necessary by the contracting
officer.
™ 27 25 CHAP 25
1V20/79 PAR 18
157
-------
MANUAL CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
Evaluations shall be performed in accordance with the procedures
previously prescribed for use in the evaluation of initial offers
(see paragraph 14, Evaluation Procedures and paragraph 16, Evaluation
Considerations) in order to determine the relative ranking of the
revised offers.
d. Limitation. Contracting officers shall not call for "best
and final" offers more than once unless fully justified and then only
when approved by the SSO.
20. SOURCE SELECTION DECISIONS.
a. General. The selection of a source, or sources, for negotia-
tions shall be made after the receipt and evaluation of "best and final"
offers. The decision as to the source selection for negotiations and
for award is made by the SSO based upon consideration of the technical
scores, business and management ratings, price or cost, and other factors
which may influence the award decision. With regard to technical scores,
EPA normally uses technical point ratings of offers in -establishing the
relative ranking of offers. Technical point ratings are useful guides
in the evaluation of offers but they are not conclusive as to the actual
merit of offers. The final merit of the offers is determined by informed
review of technical evaluation narratives, descriptive ratings, and
other relevant information in addition to point scores. After technical
merit is determined, the SSO must consider the price or cost, business
aspects, and such other factors as may influence the decision to select
one offeror in preference to other offerers.
b. SSO Selection. After the SSO has reviewed the SEE report he
shall prepare, or direct the preparation of, a source selection decision
report which shall reflect:
(1) The source(s) selection decision;
(2) Comprehensive rationale for the decision;
(3) Authorization for the contracting officer to conduct
negotiations with the source(s) selected; and
(4) Authorization to award a contract upon successful completion
of negotiations.
CHAP 25 TN 27
PAR 19 26 11/20/79
158
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
c. Contracting Officer Selection. The contracting officer
shall prepare a source selection decision report for those
procurement actions not in excess of $2,000,000 which reflects:
(1) The source selection decision; and
(2) Comprehensive rationale for the decision.
21. NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SOURCE SELECTED. The contracting officer,
assisted by the contract specialist and such other technical and
business specialists as deemed appropriate, shall conduct
negotiations with the source selected. Such negotiations shall not
involve material changes which, in the judgment of the contracting
officer, would alter the basis for the source selection decision. In
the event that the SSO directs negotiations with more than one
source, negotiations may be conducted successively with those sources
selected. At the conclusion of negotiations, offerers will be
requested to submit written confirmation of agreements with respect
to price and other significant elements agreed upon. A common cut
off date shall be established for the receipt of these confirmations.
The procedures described in paragraph 20, Source Selection Decisions,
subparagraphs b(l), (2), and (4) or, subparagraph c, as appropriate,
shall be followed to document the selection decision. Negotiations
at this point in the source evaluation and selection process permits
consideration and correction of elements and subelements which were
assigned numerical values of "0," "1," or "23." However, any
discussion of deficiencies during final negotiations shall avoid
revealing a competitor's idea.
22. AWARD. Contract award shall be made to that offeror who has
submited an offer which promises the greatest advantage to EPA in
terms of performance at an affordable cost, and as a result of fair
and impartial evaluation. However, award shall be made only after
all required clearances and approvals have been obtained.
23. NOTIFICATIONS TO UNSUCCESSFUL OFKERORS.
a. Unacceptable Offers. In accordance with the conditions set
forth in 41 CFR l-3.103(b)(l), a preaward notice shall be given to
those offerers whose offers have been determined to be unacceptable
as a result of the intitial evaluation made pursuant to subparagraph
14a of this Chapter. The notice shall be substantially in
accordance with Figure 25-1 and shall be furnished promptly when it
appears that it will take longer than 30 days to make an award after
the offer has been determined to be unacceptable.
TN 27 ^ CHAP 25
H/20/79 PAR 20
159
-------
MANUAL
CHAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES
b. Competitive Range. 41 CFR l-3.103(b)(1) also prescribes
that notice be given in any procurement of more than $10,000 in which
it appears that it will take longer than 30 days to make an award
after a competitive range determination has been made. This
notification shall be provided to all offerers at the same time.
Where an offerer is determined to be within the competitive range for
a specific category(s) of work required by the solicitation and
outside the competitive range in other category(s) of work, the
offerer shall be promptly notified that, after evaluation, it has
been determined that he is outside the competitive range for a
certain category(s). The procedure is applicable when multiple
awards based on distinct categories of work are anticipated. The
purpose is to put the offerer on notice that an offer for a specific
category(s) of work will not receive further consideration. The
notice shall be substantially in accordance with Figure 25-2.
c. Unsuccessful Offerers. Offerers who have not been selected
for award shall be notified as promptly as possible that their offers
are no longer being considered. If after selection of the successful
offerer, it is expected that an award will be made in a short period
of time, those offerers that were within the competitive range but
have not been selected for award, need not be notified. In such
cases, the notification shall be made after award (see FPR 1-3.103(c)).
Where notification is made before award, such notice shall be
substantially in accordance with Figure 25-3.
24. DEBRIEFING. If unsuccessful offerers request a debriefing prior
to contract award, they shall be afforded the opportunity for a
formal debriefing provided that the contract award will not be
unreasonably delayed. Debriefing shall be conducted for only those
offerers who submit written requests and where the request has been
signed by a corporate official, senior partner, or other comparable
executive of the offerer. Debriefings must be absolutely factual and
in conformance with the documentation supporting the decision of the
selection official. Restrictions on disclosure of information
pertaining to any other offerer's proposal are set forth in
FPR 1-3.103(c).
25 28 ™™
PAR 23 1V20/79
160
-------
G1AP3R 25
SOUKS EVALUsricH MID SEIECTICH PROCEDURES OCKTRACTO HOMAGE; r:.T
Gentlemen:
Your proposal submitted in response to our Request for Proposals No.
has been received and has undergone an initial
technical evaluation. As a result of this evaluation, your proposal
has been found to be inadequate in the treatment of certain elements
which we consider to be essential for successful contract performance.
The inadequate areas were (briefly explain the areas which were
considered inadequate).
A substantial modification of your proposal would be necessary to
correct the inadequate treatment. The "Late Proposals, Modifications
of Proposals, and Withdrawals of Proposals" provision in the request
for proposals precludes consideration of any modification of a
proposal received after the date and time specified. Based on the
foregoing, your proposal will not receive further consideration nor
will any modifications be considered.
Your interest in EPA programs is appreciated. We encourage you to
continue responding to our future requirements.
Sincerely yours,
Contracting Officer
Figure 25-1. Notice to ttiacosptable Offerers
CHAP 25
1V20/79
161
-------
CHAPTER 25
SOURCE EVMilATICN AND SELECTION PROCEDURES CCtrTRACTS MJg»fg?;ryT
Gentlanen:
So that you may redirect resources held in anticipation of receiving
a contract award, this Agency, as a service to you, is providing
advance information which indicates your proposal submitted in
response to RPP No. ___________ was determined not to be within
the competitive range.
Based on the foregoing, revisions to your proposal will not be
considered. Following award of the contract you will receive a
further notice setting forth the successful contractor and the
contract amount. We wish to express appreciation for your interest
in EPA programs, and encourage you to continue responding to our
future requirements.
Sincerely yours,
Contracting Officer
TN_27 Figure 25-2. Notice to Offerers Outside the Competitive Range CHAP 25
11/20/79
162
-------
CH^ER 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AMD SELECTia: PHCGDUSCS CffirTRACTS
Gentleman:
So that you may redirect resources held in anticipation of receiving
a contract award, this Agency, as a service to you, is providing
advance information which indicates your proposal for
although judged to be in the
conpetitive range will not be considered Cor further negotiation.
Subsequent revisions to your proposal will not be considered.
We have selected the firm listed below as the offerer whose proposal
offers the greatest advantage to the Government, price or cost,
technical, and other factors considered. Negotiations will be held
with:
(Name of source selected for negotiations)
Following award of the contract, you will receive a further letter
setting forth the name of the successful contractor and the contract
amount. We wish to express appreciation for your interest in EPA
programs and encourage you to continue responding to our future
requirements.
Sincerely yours,
Contracting Officer
TN-27 Figure 25-3. Advanced Notice of Offer Selected for Negotiations "BlfiP 25
11/20/79
163
-------
.ciai am snzcrioK PKXETLTSS
PROCESSING SEQUENCE
FDR
SOURCE EVWJOATION AND SELECTION
1. Procurement Request
2. Develop evaluation criteria for the solicitation
3. Prepare and issue the solicitation
4. Receive offers
5. Conduct preliminary evaluation
6. Determine the competitive range
7. Conduct written or oral discussions
8. Request "Best and Final" offers
9. Receive and evaluate "Best and Final" offers
10. Select the source for negotiations
11. Conduct negotiations with the source selected
12. Conclude negotiations - Debriefing if desired
13. Award the Contract
14. Debriefing - if not conducted at the conclusion of negotiations
TN-27 Figure 25-4. CHAP 25
1V20/79
164
-------
CH3PTTR 25
SOURCE EVALUATION AMD JELCCTKU PRDGEDTOCa QEHTRACTS MMMCgT??? fJOTJAL
PROPOSAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION
RFP NUMBER AND TITLE:_
OFFEROR:
EVALUATED BY: DATE:
MAXIMUM SCORE ATTAINABLE: EVALUATION SCORE:
EVALUATION CRITERIA - SCORING PLAN - SCORE
~t,
A. ADEQUACY OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
1. Understanding Scope of Work (Assigned Weight: Points)
£ Value Descriptive Statement
00 Not addressed.
20 1 Addressed but totally deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency cannot be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
40 2a - Addressed but deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency may be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
40 2b Appears to be deficient; however,
clarification or substantiation is required,
and final scores will be determined
subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
60 3 Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
80 4 Good; has some superior features.
100 5 Generally superior in most features.
(Score: % of Assigned Weight )
Figure 25-5. (Page 1 of 5) CHAP 25
165
-------
OAPTER 25
CONTRACTS MKJAGE-lENr MANUAL SOURCC SVaLUKTICH AND gTTBCTICN PROCEDURES
2. Project Approach (Assigned Weight: Points)
* Value Descriptive Statement
00 Not addressed.
20 1 Addressed but totally deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency cannot be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
40 2a Addressed but deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of conpetence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency may be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
40 2b Appears to be deficient; however,
clarification or substantiation is required,
and final scores will be determined
subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
60 3 Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
80 4 Good; has some superior features.
100 5 Generally superior in most features.
(Score: % of Assigned Weight )
3. Project Management - Resources Allocation (Assigned Weight:
Points)
Descriptive Statement
Not addressed.
Addressed but totally deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency cannot be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
(SAP 25 Figure 25-5. (Page 2 of 5) TN-27
n/20/79
166
-------
CSPTER 25
SOURCE KID EVALUATION
CCKTRflCTS II
40 2b
60 3
80 4
100 S
40 2a
40 2b
Descriptive Statement
Addressed but deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency may be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
Appears to be deficient; however,
clarification or substantiation is required,
and final scores will be determined
subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
Good; has some superior features.
Generally superior in most features.
(Score: % of Assigned Weight )
Descriptive Statement
Not addressed.
Addressed but totally deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency cannot be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
Addressed but deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lade of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency may be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
Appears to be deficient; however/
clarification or substantiation is required,
and final scores will be determined
subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
TO-27
1V20/79
Figure 25-5. (Page 3 of 5)
CHAP 25
167
-------
OCNTRACTS MANAGEMENT MANUAL
GttPTER 25
SOURCE JiND EWLUariCK SELECTICK PROCEDURES
£ Value Descriptive Statement
60 3 Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
80 4 Good; has some superior features.
100 5 Generally superior in most features.
(Score: % of Assigned Weight )
2. Personnel Background and Experience (Assigned Weight:
Points)
£ Value Descriptive Statement
00 Not addressed.
20 1 Addressed but totally deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency cannot be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
40 2a Addressed but deficient in management
ability; engineering or, scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency may be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
40 2b Appears to be deficient; however,
clarification or substantiation is required,
and final scores will be determined
subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
60 3 Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
80 4 Good; has sane superior features.
100 5 Generally superior in most features.
(Score: % of Assigned Weight )
3. Facilities .(Assigned Weight: Points)
± Value Descriptive Statement
Not addressed.
0
20
0
1
Addressed but totally deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency cannot be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
(SAP 25
Figure 25-5. (Page 4 of 5)
168
TN-27
11/20/79
-------
SELECTICH
40
Value
2a
40 2b
60
80
100
3
4
5
Descriptive Statement
Addressed but deficient in management
ability; engineering or scientific judgment;
lack of competence or inventiveness, to the
degree that the deficiency nay be corrected
by negotiations subsequent to selection.
Appears to be deficient; however,
clarification or substantiation is required,
and final scores will be determined
subsequent to written and/or oral questions.
Adequate; overall it meets the specifications.
Goodi has some superior features.
Generally superior in most features.
(Score: % of Assigned Weight )
DEBRIEFING REMARKS s (Specific comments concerning the proposal as it
relates to the technical evaluation criteria in the RFP).
NOTE: Detailed data substantiating any score shall be made available
by the evaluator upon request.
***** 25-5. (Page 5 of 5}
CHRP 25
169
-------
8.17 Table of Contents: Contracts Management
Manual
170
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTENTS OF CHAPTERS
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT MANUAL
MANUAL
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER CHAPTER
TITLES NUMBERS
PROCUREMENT REQUEST/REQUISITION AND RATIONALE DOCUMENT 1
RESERVED 2
NONCOMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT AND LIMITED COMPETITION 3
UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS 4
MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES 5
RESERVED 6
RESERVED 7
PRIORITY PROCUREMENT REQUESTS 8
IMPROVEMENTS TO NON-GOVERNMENT REALTY 9
PROCUREMENT UNDER ERA'S 8{a) SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM 10
CONTROL OF CONTRACT INFORMATION WITHIN REGIONAL OFFICES 11
CONTRACTOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION 12
CONTRACT VOUCHER PROCESSING 13
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS 14
PROCUREMENT OF MEMBERSHIPS IN ASSOCIATIONS 15
PROTECTIVE SERVICES 16
PREAWARD CLEARANCE 17
COST REVIEW AND AUDIT POLICY 18
BIDDERS/SOURCE LIST SYSTEM 19
STANDARDIZATION OF REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS 20
PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF EPA-SPONSORED
MEETINGS, CONFERENCES, AND SYMPOSIUMS 21
PROCUREMENT PLAN 22
RATIFICATION OF UNAUTHORIZATION PROCUREMENT 23
STANDARDIZED CONTRACT ARTICLES 24
SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES 25
CDST-PLUS-AWARD-FEE CONTRACTING 26
APPENDIX A. RELATED EPA DIRECTIVES
(3/12/82) i
171
-------
8.18 A Case Study in Project Management
172
-------
Development of The Blue Plains Waste Treatment
Data Storage and Retrieval System
Background
The staff of EFA-Cincinnati Municipal and Environmental Research
Laboratory (MERL), in cooperation with the District of Columbia,
operates a combined biological/physical-chemical Advanced Waste
Treatment reuse system at the Blue Plains Pilot Plant in Washington,
D.C. The system treats municipal wastewater using lime clarifica-
tion, dispersed growth nitrification, fixed-film denitrification,
carbon absorption, filtration, and chlorination for disinfection.
A schematic flow diagram is shown in Figure 1. The treatment system
is operated on a continuous basis by operators assigned to 3-8 hour
shifts each day. Samples are taken manually and composited in
refrigerator containers as required for later analysis by EPA lab-
oratories .
Through long-term intensive studies, EPA is evaluating performance
characteristics of six treatment processes in an effort to demon-
strate the potential for reliably producing potable quality water
from treated municipal waste water. Specific objectives of these
studies include:
1. Identification and measurement of specific pollutants in
the system's final effluent, and the performance of in-
dividual processes in removing these pollutants.
2. Provide data on process and system performance variability
and reliability with respect to pollutant removal.
On Hay 29, 1975, Alan Waters (MERL) requested support from the EFA-
Cincinnati Computer Services and Systems Division for the design and
development of a flexible data storage and retrieval system capable
to support the handling and analysis of a continuous stream of waste
treatment data. Appendix I provides the users statement of require-
ments for the system.
On June 9, 1975, Apex Systems Development Corporation was awarded a
contract to initiate the systems analysis phase, and perform a review
and evaluation of the MERL requirements for entry, storage and re-
trieval of the Blue Plains water quality data. The contractor was also
required to develop detailed functional design specifications relevant
to' a storage and retrieval system, and to present a comprehensive
project plan, schedule and cost projection for implementation of the
system.
173
-------
BO
1
u
| * 1 Hi
1 1 r~
SCR&bn
««
M
$
I
1
a
h
1
w
a
f
MIX
LIME
H5-
CLARIFICATION
H7
1
H8 y-
S~
•*
i1" V_
VHOBW
*T
w
*
u
*s
s
to
DRAIN
S
1
BACKWASH
FROM
NITRIFICATION
AU
n*
| 1 A7
1 Al A2 A3 AA . T i A/ .
1
1 ........ A6
! L J
1 A8 ^^^
r
WASTE
WATER
DENITRIFICATION
IZTHANOL
^
L
tlCHJ
IOA
H
11
1
1-
— rr
12
*
{
f
13
t
T7
CARBON
FILTERS
1
Jl
*_
DENITRIFICATION
Figure
I
^ •
KO FILTRATION^
1 1 1 'S-^I I 1
I
J2 J3 J4 g Kl K3 K4
ALUM
* i i J7 — 3 — — 1 — 1
r _.. i F T ,j Y t f
CARBON AD_SORJTION_ HOLDING TANK
K7
CHLORINE
JLO
CONTACT
CI1LORINATION ' TANK
Schematic Flow Diagram
FINAL -
-------
The period of performance for the systems analysis effort was established
as three months; the final report including the aforementioned infor-
mation requirements was due for delivery to EPA by September 9, 1975.
The project staff assigned by Apex Systems Development Corporation in-
cluded Dave Jones as Systems Analyst, and Harvey Macken, Programmer.
Dave's formal academic training was biochemistry, and had several years
of ADP experience in the design and programming of scientific computer
applications including similar data storage and retrieval systems.
Harvey, the assigned Programmer, had a chemistry background and a few
years in programming of scientific applications on the UNIVAC 1110
computer system. Apex management felt confident that Dave and Harvey
comprised a qualified team to translate the MERL requirements into an
effective data storage and retrieval system which would be tailored to
directly support a waste treatment facility operated by personnel having
no ADP background. Dave, having supported several EPA scientific
projects in the past was known to EPA's ADP management and several lab-
oratory researchers as having high level of technical competence in
ADP and environmental research.
A meeting on June 17, 1975, was held with MERL personnel, EPA's ADP
branch chief, and the Apex project team. Alan Waters of MERL, had the
responsibility of determining and analyzing the performance character-
istics of the Blue Plains Pilot Plant. Each month, using a desk calcu-
lator, Allan performed numerous calculations to determine average levels
and variations of pollutant concentrations at each of several stages in
the treatment process. Obviously, there was a limit to the analysis'
Alan could perform; he therefore had an active interest in the proposed
automated data storage and retrieval system. During the meeting, Alan
displayed a chart of measurements taken at 35 sampling stations distributed
throughout the six treatment processes, and related to 105 biological,
chemical and other types of parameters.
At the meeting, the discussions focused on the physical structure of
the treatment plant, sampling schedules, the functions performed by
personnel who operate and manage the treatment plant, and options for
interfacing with a computer storage and retrieval system. Since the
operation at the treatment plant and laboratory chemists were continually
recording measurements on large laboratory bench sheets, a decision was
reached to prepare preprinted data recording forms which would be for-
matted for ease of keypunching, or direct entry through low speed terminals.
As an action item, Alan Waters was supposed to prescribe expected minimum-
maximum values for each parameter at each sampling station. These
specifications would be useful later for data editing purposes.
175
-------
After the June 17 meeting the Apex project team started to formulate
a conceptual design of the storage and retrieval system; this design
facilitated data entry through both batch and low speed terminal
facilities, and would provide an interactive capability for entry and
editing of raw data, and permit retrievals of data over any time period,
and invoke the generation of several summary and statistical reports
for any selected performance period.
The ADP equipment resources available included the Univac 1110 computer
at the Environmental Research Center, Research Triangle Park, N. C.,
and two IBM 370/158 computers at Optimum Systems, Inc., Bethesda, Md.
Both facilities were assessed through CSSD's remote job entry terminals
and low speed conversational terminals. CSSD utilized both ASCII and
EBCDIC low speed terminals. The RJE terminals included a Data General
840 minicomputer, the Data 100/78 and Data 100/70 terminals, and were
installed at two locations in the Cincinnati area.
On July 29, 1975, the Apex project team presented the results of systems
analysis and design efforts to EPA personnel. A preliminary functional
design, data file structures, brief program module functional description,
and examples of an interactive terminal language to be used for data
entry and editing, retrievals of data reports and plots, and a data
entry forms design. The meeting was successful; the design was accept-
able, and demonstrated to the plant operating personnel how easy it
would be to perform the data recording functions. These personnel saw
how operational status reports could benefit them directly on a daily
basis.
On September 2, 1975, Apex completed and delivered the Final Report
which included a system design overview, program descriptions, file
descriptions, input forms layout, cost projection and implementation
schedule. Appendix II provides abstracts of the system functional de-
sign specifications, cost projection for each program module and an
implementation schedule. The total projected cost for detailed program
design and implementation was $7112, plus $1476 for training of EPA
personnel; the total schedule for implementation and documentation was
16 weeks. Effective October 8, 1975, the contract with Apex Systems
Development Corporation was amended to procure the services for system
implementation, documentation and training. The data storage and re-
trieval system was scheduled to be operational by January 7, 1976, and
available for continuous acquisition and editing of the treatment data.
System documentation and operating procedures would be completed by
January 21, 1976.
176
-------
As defined by Apex, the following were established as the major project
milestones:
1. Coding, testing and implementing the program for batch
and/or demand processing of system specifications,
program PREP, and the program for displaying the current
system configuration, program SYSTAT.
2. Coding, testing and Implementing the program for data
entry and storage, program DATASTORE, and the report
generator, program REPGEN.
3. Entering the backlog of data.
4. Coding, testing and implementing the plot preprocessor,
program PREPLOT, and making modifications to TYPLOT.
5. Completion of Systems Documentation and Users Manual.
6. Training Blue Plains personnel in use of coding forms
and system operation.
At the time the system Implementation began, the estimate of back-log
treatment data was low; this resulted in an oversimplification of the
effort required and methods suitable for capturing such data in a form
suitable for computer input. The decision was made to defer this
portion of the project to a later date as possibly an independent
project. However, 3 months actual data were required for program test-
ing; such data would be provided by the Pilot Plant operating personnel
to Apex who would then transcribe them onto the standard input coding
forms.
As required by the Contract, Apex Systems Development Corporation de-
livered monthly progress reports and financial status reports. The
progress reports state the accomplishments during the report period,
problems encountered, and a projection of work to be accomplished in
the next report period. Actual monthly progress reports from Apex are
included in Apendlx III. The financial status reports stated the
current expenditure by labor classification during the report period,
total funds allocated to date, and the balance of unexpended funds.
177
-------
Notice of Cost Overview and Schedule Slippage
On January 21, 1976, the contractor advised EPA of considerable dif-
ficulty in implementing the data storage and retrieval system within
the funds allocated and the established schedule; and that all funds
had been expended. These difficulties were attributed to:
. sporadic and frequent malfunctioning of the Unlvac 1110 which
caused substantial lost time,
limited quantity of low speed terminals at EPA for communication
with the Univac 1110 system,
technical difficulties in interfacing EPA's Data 100 medium
speed RJE terminals with the Univac 1110, and conflicts in
sharing these RJE resources with other applications, primarily
administrative applications,
technical difficulties with unstable telecommunications facilities
used for access to the Univac 1110 system.
The contractor requested allocation of additional funds to complete the
project; the new projection for cost to complete was $5693; no estimate
was given for the revised completion date.
Figure 2 Illustrates a graph of the monthly and cumulative expenditures
through January 27, 1976, and includes expenditure profiles for both the
systems analysis and Implementation phases.
178
-------
EXPENDITURES FOR BLUE PLBINS
MONTHS STRRT WITH JUNE 1975 THROUGH JRNURRY 1976
1000.00
r1600.oo
vo
L
o
•-•
*
OC.
o.
X
4 STSTDfS ARUT8IS
PH1SB
J
^MONTHS""
-------
Assignment Questions
1. If you were Che user (or Project Officer) what options are avail-
able to you on January 21, 1976?
2. If you were the Apex Project Manager, what alternatives are possible
for completion of the project, and what are the required conditions?
3. Did the contractor have a viable plan for system implementation?
4. Was the Apex system design effort sufficiently detailed?
5. What techniques would you have used for planning and controlling
programming effort and costs:
a. if you were the Apex Project Manager,
b. if you were the EPA User or Project Officer.
6. If you were the Project Officer (or user), what would you expect
from the Apex Project Manager in response to question No. 5?
7. Did the contractor attempt to anticipate problems?
8. What kinds of problems could have been anticipated? How should
they be handled?
9. Was there a plan to demonstrate compliance with requirements?
10. Evaluate the contractor's proposed design and implementation plan.
Name three key project management principles which were evident
and/or deficient in the contractor's design and plan.
180
-------
Appendix I
Requirement for a Computerized Data Handling System
The development of the data system should be composed of two (2) phases:
(1) an analysis of the reuse project that will include both data storage
and retrieval programs; and (2) implementation of the programs identified
in (1).
The data storage program will have the following characteristics:
1. It must be flexible and versatile.
2. Include design of forms for data recording.
3. Must be able to use on RTF computer system.
4. Must identify items on IBM cards, if used, so they can be
recognized, e.g., COD • 10.
5. Print out and other output must be in readily understandable
language, e.g., print-outs will have columns headed by
measurement, COD, TOC, etc.
6. Quality control must be incorporated into the program to
detect erroneous data.
7. Ability to make changes and corrections.
8. Ability to enter present accumulated data.
9. Ability to handle zero or missing data.
The data retrieval program will have the following characteristics:
1. Ability to provide both statistical and graphically plotted
data output.
2. Flexible and versatile so that correlations can be made with
ease, e.g. if a plot of concentration vs. time provides only
partial correlation, the retrieval system should be able to
provide a variation of this data in a separate plot for com-
parison purposes.
3. The output must be readily accessible from lowspeed terminals
by the Blue Plains Pilot Plant staff for their reporting
purposes.
181
-------
4. Ability to provide basic statistical output now, with capa-
bility for more elaborate output later.
5. Specific statistical output correlations between sampling
points and analytical parameters are shown in Table 2 and
the program shall provide this information.
Implementation of the program shall take place as soon as possible after
design specifications have been approved and the procedures required to
enter the data shall be coordinated with the Blue Plains Pilot Plant
staff to insure ease of data entry and retrieval. Entry of data from
the working forms designed in the systems analysis phase shall be
handled by the Computer Services and Systems Division and also, all
retrieval efforts will be the responsibility of this group. A contact
person in the computer group will serve to provide the output to either
the Blue Plains staff or the MERL-Cincinnati staff.
182
-------
Appendix II - System Design Proposed By Apex System Development Corporation
A. System Overview
The proposed storage and retrieval system is designed for use
on the UNIVAC 1110 located at Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. Two distinct types of processing are allowed for
remote users. Batch processing allows the user to submit a
set of cards or card images to tlie computer for processing
without the user being asked for additional information while
processing is taking place. The user obtains all output
after processing is complete. Demand processing allows the
user to interact with tne computer while processing is taking
place, with any results of the processing being returned
immediately to the user.
Although all programs of the proposed system are designed to
run in batch or demand mode, certain functions have been
restricted to one mode or the other. The user is restricted
to batch mode when there is a sufficient volume of data to be
entered. Batch processing will eliminate the task of sitting
in front of a terminal for a long interactive terminal
session. When the user is restricted to demand mode it is
felt that the queries from the system will be beneficial in
entering the data and will also allow the user to benefit
from the 'quick-look1 capability of the system, i.e. the user
will be able to get a listing directly from the terminal
instead of waiting for batch turnaround. Mode restriction
will be performed in the following way. Each program will
have two sets of ECL (Executive Control Language -
instructions to the operating system telling the computer
what to do with a program) - one for demand processing and
one for batch processing. The ECL for batch processing will
set bit 12 of the Run Status Word (RSW); the ECL for demand
processing will turn off bit 12 of the RSW. FORTRAN programs
can access the RSW by the SSWITCH routine. If bit 12 is on,
indicating batch processing, and the user attempts a function
restricted to demand mode, an error occurs and processing
will terminate. A similar error will occur if the user
attempts a function restricted to batch mode from demand
processing, however processing will continue and the user
will receive a message indicating he may not execute the
requested function in demand mode.
The proposed system is modular in design. As the user needs
more or different information, programs may be added or
modified without destroying the integrity of the system. At
present, the minimum configuration for a storage and
retrieval system is supplied, so as to not overwhelm the user
with a lot of unnecessary options.
Figure II-1 shows the flowchart of the proposed storage and
retrieval system. The user enters the system description
(i.e. Subsystems, Sampling Stations, Parameters, etc.) into
program PREP, which builds the Master Directory. Then, as
the user begins to collect data from the system, it is
entered into program DATASTORE, whicn adds this data to the
183
-------
UAT:; STORAGE A:ID RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS
PREP
PROGRAM
A
FILES
FILEA
->j MASTER
DIRECTORY
CARD OR
TERMINAL
INPUT
CARD OR
TERMINAL
INPUT
J
I
V
SYSTAT
PROGRAM
CARD OR
TERMINAL
INPUT
DATASTORE
PROGRAM
/
\
\
1
3 CARD OR
'ERMINAL
INPUT
DATA
FILE
\
\
f
1 REPORT
GENERATOR
\
f
REPORTS
. ^X-— '
/
\
f
PLOT
PREPROCESSOR <
V
f
'
r PLOT FILE
CARD IMAGES
\f
PLOT
PROGRAM
184
GRAPHIC
OUTPUT
SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION
IINAL INPUT
ONLY
Figure II-l
-------
large on-line data file. Now, if the user wishes reports of
data already collected, program REPGEN is run which can
provide him with certain statistics as well as data listings.
If plots of the data are desired, the PREPLOT program is run,
which builds up a card file that may then be transmitted to
OSI for use by a modified version of TYPLOT. The plots are
to be generated at OSI since RTF does not at present support
remote plotting.
Although much checking of data is done before it enters the
on-line data file, errors invariably are found. The user
may, at any time, edit his data file to alter or remove
erroneous data by specifying one of several editing functions
in program DATASTORE. If the user decides to expand the
system (i.e. add more sampling stations or parameters) he may
do this at any time by using'the add function of program
PREP. If the user wishes to display the system
configuration, he may run program SYSTAT.
Some minor changes are necessary to the current Blue Plains
Plant system nomenclature to improve overall description of
the storage and retrieval system. At present, each sampling
station (test node) is referenced by a letter followed by a
digit or several numbers or digits. It is suggested that
each sampling station code be limited to two characters, the
first character representing the subsystem (process) as is
now done, the second limited to a single digit or letter.
This method will allow for thirty-six sampling stations per
subsystem. If more stations are desired, the large subsystem
may be subdivided into several smaller subsystems. Using the
present designation, a maximum of twenty-six subsystems are
allowed.
At present, samples are drawn from the sampling station at a
number of different frequencies, ranging from three times a
day to once a month. These may be separated into three
distinct types; Grab, Daily Composite and Weekly Composite.
A grab sample can be uniquely identified by a date and time,
while composite samples can only be identified by date. So
it is suggested that tue numerous frequency codes be replaced
by just three; G for Grab, D for Daily Composite and W for
Weekly Composite.
185
-------
B» Program Descriptions
1. Prep Program
This program is run at the beginning of each pilot plant study
and actually builds the Master Directory. This program may also
be used to add more sampling stations to the Master Directory
during a pilot study if so desired. It can be run in either
timesharing or batch mode.
2. Data Storage and Edit
This is the program which initially Inserts the data into the
file and is used later to make additions to the current data base.
It will also have the capability of checking the input data to
see if the input value is within the minimum and maximum expected
values for that specific parameter. If an out of bounds value is
really an acceptable value, it can be entered and the user will
be notified of this procedure. The edit capability will also
allow the user to access the data base to correct keypunching or
other errors which may be detected. It can be run in timesharing
or batch mode.
3. SYSTAT Program
This program (not shown on the system flowchart) will allow the
user to display the current system configuration listing subsystem
sampling station, and parameters measured at each sampling station.
It should be run in batch mode if the entire system configuration
is desired. However, if the user wants to see a particular sub-
system or sampling station, it may be executed in the timesharing
mode.
4. Report Generator
This program will provide statistical reports of the data. Such
statistics as mean, variance, standard deviation, standard error
and confidence limits about the mean will be Included. The raw
data may or may not be printed, depending upon the options exercised.
The reports may be either a history report - including all the data
that has been recorded or a period report - including data between
a beginning and ending date. History reports should be run in the
batch mode while short period reports executed from timesharing will
provide a "quick-look" capability. Reports can be provided by
sampling station, subsystem, or parameter.
186
-------
5. Plot Preprocessor
This program will combine data to be plotted along with control
information to produce the desired plots. It may be run in either
timesharing or batch mode.
6. Plot Program
This program takes information collected from the plot preprocessor
and produces the desired plots. It should be run in batch mode.
At the present time, RTF does not support remote plotting; in other
words, RTP cannot send plotting Instructions across the data phone
line to the remote plotter. However, it may be possible to produce
punched cards containing the plotting instructions and by using
these cards off line to drive the plotter produce to the plots.
Another alternative would be to develop Tektronics software which
would allow a Tektronics 4012 to be used to provide the plotted
output. These are a couple of alternatives under consideration
as Interim proposals until RTP acquires the software necessary to
support remote plotting.
C. File Descriptions
1. Master Directory
As presently conceived, the master directory will consist of two
different data files. The first file will contain the sub-system,
sampling station, parameter relationships (FILE A). The second
file will consist of the parameter, sampling station relationships
(FILE B). These files will be read sequentially Into any program
which uses them so that system expansion (i.e. making the master
directory larger) may be easily accomplished. A more detailed de-
scription of these files follows.
FILE A
This file consists of four distinct record types:
a. System Title, number of subsystems (N), beginning date of
system (so weekly composites can be date checked for validity),
total current number of sampling stations.
b. Subsystem code, subsystem title, number of sampling stations
(M).
c. Station Code, station title, station number, number of para-
meters measured (L).
187
-------
d. Parameter number, sample type (repeated up to 14 times per
record. For more than 14 parameters multiple records will
be used.
For this file there is only one type "a" record. Type "b"
is repeated N times, each followed by M of type c; each
IIJH
type "c" being followed by at lease one record of type "d
depending upon how many parameters are being sampled at that
station. An example of the record layout for this file is
shown below.
Record Type
a
b
c
d
c
d
d
Information
BLUE PLAINS PILOT TREATMENT PLANT 6 750*90 36
H LIME CLARIFICATION 7
0 substation 0 title 1 2
1G9G
1 substation 1 title 2 27
2C4C10C13G19G....
37W38G
c
d
b
c
d
9 substation 9 title 9
1G30G31G34D
A NITRIFICATION 9
0 substation 0 title 10
2G
b
c
d
c
d
END OF FILE
L CHLORINATION 2
0 substation 0 title 35 1
1G
7 substation 7 title 36 10
2C5C6G9G10W
188
-------
FILE B
This file consists of three distinct record types.
a. Total Current Number of parameters.
b. Alphameric parameter code, chemical unit code, Initial
record pointer, number of stations sampled at (N).
c. Type of sample, station number, minimum acceptable value,
maximum acceptable value (repeated up to 7 times per record).
For more than 7 stations, multiple records will be used.
Again there is only one type "a" record. The type "b" record
is repeated N times, each one being followed by one or many
type "c" records depending upon how many stations that particu-
lar parameter is being sampled. An example of the record layout
for this record is shown below.
Record Type Information
a 60
b FLOW MGAL/MIN 1 10
c 61 0.0 10.0 G5 0.0 10.0
c 634 0.0 10.0 635 0.0 10.0
b FH 28
c D2 1.0 14.0 d$ 1.0 14.0
b CL2 LBS 60 1
c G36 1.0 10.0
END OF FILE
189
-------
D. Program Specifications
This section contains the program specifications for the
proposed storage and retrieval system. Each program
description contains a list of the input files, output files,
card formats and coding forms where necessary, and a brief
description of program operation and functions.
Program PREP
Program Functions:
1. To build the master directory (FILEA, FILED)
2. To add to the system as the system configuration
changes.
Input Files:
1. Card or terminal input.
2. FILEA (only input for add function) - contains
subsystem, sampling station, parameter
relationships.
3. FILES (only input for add function) - contains
parameter, sampling station relationships.
Output Files:
1. FILEA
2. FILEB
Program Description:
Because of the large number of parameters, labeling
information, and data values necessary to create the master
directory, the initial execution of the program PREP will be
limited to batch mode. This will eliminate a long tedious
terminal session and also allow user verification of the
input data.
The edit capability of the program PREP will allow additions
and/or changes to the system configuration as a result of
either keypunch errors on initial generation or future
developments and modifications to system configuration. The
edit capability may be executed only in demand mode.
Following are the format specifications for the cards used as
the initial input to the PREP program.
190
-------
Card Formats for FILEA
Card # Col. Information
1 1-60 the system title
61 blank
62-63 month
64 blank
65-66 day
67 blank
68-69 year
70 blank
71-72 number of subsystems (N)
2 1 subsystem code
2 blank
3-38 subsystem title
39 blank
40-41 number of sampling stations for
this subsystem (M)
3 1 sampling station code
2 blank
3-38 sampling station title
39 blank
40-41 number of parameters measured
at this station (L)
4* 1-6 parameter
7 blank
8 sample type
9-10 blank
* Columns .1-10 will be repeated up to 8 times per card, for
more than U parameters multiple cards will be used.
There will be only one type 1 card for FILEA. Type 2 cards
will be repeated (N) times, each followed by (M) of type 3
cards. Each type 3 card is followed by at least one type 4
card, depending upon how many parameters are being sampled at
that station. A sample data collection sheet is shown in
figure II-2.
191
-------
BLUE PLfllNS PILOT TREflTMENT PLflNT
CflRD FORMflTS FOR FILER
CRRO TTPE 1
9TSTEH TITLE
............................................. , .
S?
HO
,
Ml
^M
m
^M
ps
OR
,
m
5B
TB
,
71
••
NO
as
,
CRRO TTPE
3
SUBSYSTEM TITLE
- NS
CHHO TTPE 3
3
SAMPLING STHTrON TITLE
NP
CRRD TTPE
PHHM.
I.D.
—
n
s
J
—
^^^~"
_—
1
PHRM.
I.B-
-
^
*
fl
S
\
21
PflRM.
i.n.
PB
S
|
91
PHRM.
I.D.
98
S
•
1
PflRM.
I.D.
1
-
-
48
S
1
i
51
PHRM.
I.D.
i i • i i
1 f ' * *
-
SB
S
51
PHRM.
I.D.
-
5B
S
——
j
71
PRRH.
I.D.
• i • i i
76
S
|
KET
NO 55
SC
NS
S3
NP
5T
NUMBER OF SUBSYSTEMS
SUBSYSTEM CODE
NUMBER OF SRHPLING STRTIBNS FBR THIS SUBSTSTEM
SRHPL1NG STRTIQN CODE
NUMBER OF PRRRMETERS MER5URED RT THIS STRTIDN
SflMPLE TTPE
(O
Figure II
18
-------
Card Formats for FILEB
Card # Col. Information
1 1-5 total number of parameters measured.
2 1-6 alphameric parameter code
7 blank
0-19 chemical unit code (i.e. MGAL/MIN)
20 blank
21-22 number of stations at which this
parameter is measured (H).
3* 1 sample type (G-grab, D-daily composite,
W-weekly composite)
2 blank
3-4 subsystem/sampling station code
5 blank
6-12 minimum expected value
13 blank
11-20 maximum expected value
* Columns 1-20 will be repeated up to 4 times per card, for
more than 4 sampling stations multiple cards will be used.
For FILEB there will again be only one type 1 card. Type 2
card is repeated (N) times, each followed by at least one
type 3 card depending upon how many sampling stations at
which the specified parameter is being sampled. A sample
data collection sheet is snown in Figure II-3.
Any error detected in execution of the PREP program will
cause termination of the run, An error message will be
printed to give the user some idea as to the extent of the
error. This process will assure the user generates his
master directory with a minimum of errors.
The PREP editor will allow the changing of certain parameters
and the addition of new branches to the system if the
configuration changes.
The parameters that may be changed are:
1. System title,
2. Subsystem title,
3. Sampling Station title,
4. Parameter name.
The parameters that may be added are:
1. Subsystems,
2. Sampling Stations,
3. Parameters.
193
-------
BLUE PLfliNS PILOT TREflTMENT PLflNT
CflRD FORMflTS FQR FILEB
TTPE i
s
HUD TTPE
»QB||
nniia
•ODE
RRO TTPE
3 6
—
—
—
3
a
CHEMICAL
UNIT CODE
11
2}
N3
?1
3
S3
en
5 11
HINIHUH
VBLUE
—
-
-
HRX1HUH
VBLUE
PI
3
T
23
S3
cn
^
26
HINIHUH
VHLUE
i^
34 Ul US US SU 61
HHXINUN
VBLUE
S
T
-
S3
CD
•••
MINI HUH
VBLUE
_
—
-
-
HfiXimiH
VHLUE
9
T
63 66 7V 8C
S3
CO
HINIHUH
VBLUE
mm
HRXIHUH
YRLUE
iT
IPfi
5
i
- TQTRL NUMBER OF PRRRMETERS MERSURED
- NUMBER OF STRTIQNS WHERE THIS PRRRNETER 15 HERSURED
- SRMPLE TTPE
3 CD - 5UBST5TEN/SRMPLING STHTlflN CODE
Figure I1-3
vo
20
-------
BLUE PLfllNS PILOT TRERTMENT PLflNT
PflRflMETER DflTfl RECORDING FORM
CRRO TYPE 1
1
PRW.
1.0.
^m
•M
9
no
•M
H
Of)
t
••
14
YR
•
IG
1
20
NO.ORTfl
UNITS
• it
CflRO TYPE 2
146 11 20 24
S3
rn
-
-
-
-
3
MB
••»
TIME
-
-
-
-
-
OHTR
VALUE
s
X
F
33
rn
^
^
__
-
—
3
26 31 40 44 46 51 60
TIME
^
-
—
ORTR
VRLUF
X
f
33
rn
i
i
BM
BBI
•M
MM
_
BBI
3
TIME
• 1 1
1 f *
BBI
••
-
-
ORTR
VALUE
X
f
64
33
CD
-
—
-
—
3
c
166 11
•M
TINE
i i t
1 t *
MB
^
ORTR
VRLUE
KET
SS CO - SAMPLING STRTIQN CODE
SC - SRNPLE FREQUENCY CODE
XF - RCCEPT FLflG FOR OUT QF RRNGE
DRYR
H NRXIHUH OF 20 ORYR UNITS CRN BE COOED ON THJS FORH
FOR ROOITIONRL ORTR UNITS. USE RNOTHER FORM
Figure II-4
vo
21
-------
IV. Cost Estimates, Implementation Plan and Schedule Proposed by
Apex SyatemsJJevelopment Corporation
The following text is divided into several sections each
having to do with a specific task in implementing the
proposed storage and retrieval system for the Blue Plains
Pilot Treatment Plant. A beginning date of September 15,
1975 is assumed for the project. If the beginning of
implementation is delayed for any reason, all dates specified
in this section will also be delayed by the number of days
difference between September 15, 1975 and the actual starting
date.
These cost estimates include the coding and punching
of pre-existing Blue Plains data. Theyafso include a time
allotment for assisting Blue Plains personnel in the
utilization of the system. The number of hours and the labor
classifications shown reflect the degree of complexity of a
given program.
A. Coding, Testing and Implementing of Program PREP,
Systems Analyst 20 hours $295.20
Programmer 60 hours $731.40
Totals 80 hours 1026.60
B. Coding, Testing and Implementing of Program SYSTAT,
Systems Analyst 15 hours $221.40
Programmer 45 hours $548.55
Totals 60 hours $769.95
Tasks A and B should be completed and ready for use by Blue
Plains personnel by October 15, 1975. This will allow the
master directory to be created and checked before actual data
is input to the system.
C. Coding, Testing and Implementing of Program DATASTORE.
Systems Analyst 30 hours $442.80
Senior Programmer 90 hours 1181.60
Totals 120 hours 1625.40
D. Coding, Testing and Implementing of Program REPGEW.
Systems Analyst 30 hours $442.80
Senior Programmer 90 hours 1181.60
Totals 120 hours 1625.40
E. Entering Backlog of Data
Data Entry Operator 80 hours $441.60
196
-------
Keypunching of the backlog of data may be started immediately
upon approval of the system. The data entry forms have been
presented in this paper. The cost present here is for Apex
to provide this support. If AWTRL can provide their own data
entry operator or keypunching service, this section may be
deleted.
The backlog of data should be able to be read into the system
by November, 30, 1975.
Tasks C, D, and E should be completed and ready for use by
Blue Plains personnel by November 30, 1975. This will allow
the data to be entered and reports to be generated.
F. Coding, Testing and Implementing of Program PREPLOT.
Systems Analyst 15 hours $221.10
Programmer 45 hours $548.55
Totals 60 hours $769.95
G. Modification and Implementation of TYPLOT-
Senior Programmer 20 hours $262.80
Tasks F and G should be completed and ready for usti by Blue
Plains personnel by December 15, 1975. This will complete
installation of the system and all capabilities will be
operational.
II. Completion of Systems Documentation and Users Manual.
Systems Analyst «0 hours $590.40
This task will be completed by December 31, 1975.
I. Project Totals
Systems Analyst 150 hours $2214.00
Senior Programmer 200 hours $2023.00
Programmer 150 hours $1828.50
Data Entry Operator 80 hours $ U41.60
Totals 580 hours $7112.10
The entire system should be implemented and fully operational
by December 31, 1975.
197
-------
TIME SCHEDULE FOR SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION
,TSK NU11BER
. 1 2 | 3 | 4 ! S | 6 | 7 | 8 t 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
14 IS | 16 | 17
Complete programs PREP &' SYSTAT
Complete programs DATASTORE & REPGEN
Complete entry of the^b&cklog of data *
Complete programs PREPLOT & TYPLOT
jgrai
Comi
iplete documentation
Complete system testing
(The data can be coded as it becomes available. The data entry program will be operational on or before
November 30, 1975.
24
vo
oo
-------
Appendix III - Contractor Progress Reports
Report Period Ending October 30. 1975
A. Work Accomplished This Report Period
During this report period, work was initiated on milestone 1.
The batch segment of program PREP, allowing initial creation of the
Master File Directory, is being tested and the demand segment,
allowing modifications to the Master File Directory is being coded.
Both segments will be operational by the end of the next report
period and progress on milestone 2 should be well underway.
B. Problem Areas
While developing program PREP, a problem was encountered in using
the DATA 100/78. Retrieving printed output, created by either
batch jobs or demand sessions, was virtually Impossible. This
seriously Impaired turnaround time for debugging runs. The only
feasible alternative has been to utilize the DATA 100/70 whenever
possible.
C. Work to be Accomplished by Next Report Period
Major Milestone 1 will be completed, meaning programs PREP and
S7STAT will be fully operational by the end of the next report
period. Work will have been started on milestone 2 and programs.
DATASTORE and REPGEN should be in the final testing phase. Mile-
stone 3 should be completed, and all system information should be
entered creating the Master File Directory. This will depend,
however, on the performance of the Blue Plains personnel in recording
the data on the coding forms provided.
D. Summary
Program PREP is in the testing stage and will be completed before
the end of the next report period. Program SYSTAT will be completed
before the end of the next report period. The change in the
scheduled completion times of these two programs is due to the
problems encountered with the DATA 100/78. However, it is anticipated
that the remaining deadlines will oe met.
199
-------
Report Period Ending November 26, 1975
A. Work Accomplished this Report Period
During this report period work on milestone 1 consisted of
Implementing and testing both the batch and demand segments
of PREP. The batch segment of PREP allows the user to enter
the system description, i.e. subsystem, sampling station, and
parameter information. This information is used to build the
Master File Directory which will be used by all subsequent
programs. The creation of the Master File Directory may be
performed only in the batch mode. The demand segment of PREP
allows the user to make additions to the Master File Directory,
and to make corrections to errors found in the heading or
labels of the system. Corrections and additions may be made
only in the demand mode.
The batch segment of PREP is operational and the Master File
Directory may be created when the data is received from the
Blue Plains personnel. The demand segment of PREP is not
fully operational, the correction portion is operational, but
the additional portion is still being tested.
An example of the deck setup and execution messages from PREP
batch and a copy of a sample terminal session for the correction
portion of PREP demand are enclosed as figures II-l and II-2
respectively.
Progress on milestone 2 consisted of coding and testing program
DATASTORE. This is the program which will allow the entry of the
backlog data from Blue Plains, it Is not fully operational and is
still being tested.
For a more complete description of these programs, please reference
the final report for EPA Task 75-28.
B. Problem Areas
The problems encountered with the DATA 100/78 were partially
alleviated by the delivery of the 1004 emulator deck. Turnaround
has greatly improved, however, there is no site-id specifically
for Data 100/78 requiring the use of the site-Id for the DATA
GENERAL 840 Minicomputer.*
*The Data 100's and the Data General 840 were operated in two
locations in Cincinnati, separated seven miles apart.
200
-------
C. Work to be Accomplished by Next Report Period
Major Milestones 1 and 2 will be completed. PREP, SYSTAT, and
DATASTORE will be fully operational and the report generator,
REPGEN, should be in the final testing stages. The backlog of
data should be entered, this however, is dependent upon the per-
formance of the Blue Plains personnel in recording the data.
D. Summary
The batch segment of PREP is fully operational and is capable
of creating the Master File Directory. The demand segment of
PREP and program DATASTORE are in the testing stage. They will
both be operational by the end of the next report period. Today,
we have not received any of the actual backlog data needed for
testing from Blue Plains.
Report Period Ending December 29. 1975
A. Work Accomplished this Report Period
During this report period, work on milestone 1 consisted of
testing and correcting the demand segments of PREP and both
batch and demand segments of SYSTAT. The batch segment of PREP,
which when executed will create the Master File Directory, is
completed and fully operational. The demand segment of PREP,
used interactively to add new subsystem, sampling stations or
parameters, or to correct keypunch and spelling errors, is not
fully operational, the correction segment is complete and
operational but the addition segment is still being tested.
The addition of a complete subsystem, with new parameters are
operational but the addition of a sampling station with parameter
to an existing sampling station is still being tested.
An example of deck setup and execution messages from PREP in
the batch mode and a copy of a sample terminal session for the
correction portion and the operational portions of the addition
segment are enclosed as figures III-l and III-2 respectively.
The batch segment of SYSTAT, which lists the current system
configuration, Is operational and an example of the deck setup
and resulting output from the program is enclosed as figure
III-3. The demand segment is still being tested.
Progress on milestone 2 consisted of further testing of program
DATASTORE. This program allows the entry of data and creates
the required data file, it is not fully operational and is still
being tested.
201
-------
B. Problem Areas
Response time on the DATA 100/78 has been greatly Improved with
the 1004 emulator, however, a problem has developed in receiving
the proper Job output. Since there is no unique site-Id for the
1004, we have been using the ID for the DATA GENERAL, and since
there is no way to put a hold on a job, when the machine is
brought up, the jobs come out without knowing whether it is a job
submitted from the Data 100/78 or the Data General. This results
in lost time in a terminal session, time on the DATA 100 and
requires that the listing either be sent by courier or the job be
resubmltted.
Another problem encountered this report period was the loss of
a segment of a program file. Roughly 400 lines of the latest
version of PREP were lost by the system and the only way to get
the file back was to obtain an earlier element cycle and update
the resulting file.
RTF will close down operations on December 24, 1975 and will not
be back up until January 5, 1976. When they do come up on
January 5, 1976, they have informed users that the reliability of
the system will not be very good for awhile. This will affect the
testing of the Blue Plains programs and cause unavoidable delays
in completing the testing.
C. Work to be Accomplished by Next Report Period
The demand segment of PREP and SYSTAT should be completed, and
the report generator should be operational. Program DATASTORE
should be operational and work will have been started on the plot
preprocessor. This is all dependent upon the reliability of the
UNIVAC system.
D. Summary
The batch segments of PREP and SYSTAT are operational and ready
for use. The demand portions of PREP and SYSTAT are still being
tested as is program DATASTORE. To date, we have not received
from the Blue Plains personnel any of the actual backlog data
needed for thorough testing.
Report Period Ending January 27, 1976
A. Work Accomplished this Report Period
During this report period, work on milestone 1 was mostly centered
'on program SYSTAT, and as a result, this program is completed and
operational. This program permits the user to list the system con-
figuration in batch mode and selected subsystem, sampling station,
or parameter information in either demand or batch mode. Examples
of batch and demand execution of SYSTAT are enclosed as Figure
IV-1 and IV-2 respectively.
202
-------
Work on program PREP was limited to debugging the addition segment,
the only inoperative segment of the program. This segment will
allow the addition of a complete subsystem, a complete sampling
station to an existing subsystem, and a new parameter. However,
the segment to add an entirely new parameter is inoperative.
B. Problem Areas
The Univac 1110 at RTF shut down operations on December 24, 1975
and was not available for use until January 5, 1976. Also, as of
January 1, 1976, RTF would only support 30 cps low speed terminals,
of which only two were available and there was only one slt-id
for these terminals. This effectively limited sign on to RTF to
one terminal. When CSSD was informed of this situation, they
obtained additional site-ids.
On January 7-8, 1976, both terminals usable to RTF were dedicated
to the System 2000 class. All terminals were packed and ready to
be moved to the new EPA facility on January 9, 1976.
Response time on the low speed terminals has been poor. Often
a terminal session would last an excessively long time to complete
a task which should normally take only a matter of minutes to
accomplish. Though RTF's mean time between failures has been
greatly improved, this is not a true representation of the pro-
ductive time available from the system.
C. Work to be Accomplished by Next Report Period
All work on this task has been suspended.
Section IV
D. Summary
Program SYSTAT is completely operational. The batch segment and
the change portion of the demand segment of program PREP are
operational and ready for use.
Program DATASTORE is partially operational in that it will allow
the entry and checking of data.
203
-------
8.19 EPA Procurement Information Notice
No. 81-46: ADP Procurement Approval
Procedures For New Word Processing
Equipment Until Award of Agencywide Office
Automation Contract
204
-------
U.S. Environmental Pfotsciion S
Ho.
81-46
9-18-81
Subject:
Reference:
Delegation of New Procurement Authority In Accordance With Federal
Procurement Regulation (FPR) Amendment 211 and Management Information
and Data Systems Division (MID3D) ADP Procurement Approval Procedures
for Automatic Data Processing (ADP) Equipment (ADPE) (Including Wbrd
Processing Equipment - WPE), Software, Services, Related Services and
Maintenance Requirements
PIN 78-28; PIN 79-47-1; Temporary Regulation 46 Supplement 2;
Contracts Policy and Review Branch memorandum of August 15, 1980,
entitled "Word Processing Procurements - Alert?" PIN 80-43; FPR
Amendment 211 to 41 CFR Part 1-4, January 5, 1981; 41 CFR 101
Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR Sections 101-11.9
and 101-35. through 36 (policy guidance on word processing equip-
ment and services); the MIDSD "Guidelines for Conducting Feasibility
Studies and Submitting Procurement Regulations for Office Automation
Systems" dated November 24, 1980.
Discussion: PIN 78-28 delegated procurement authority (with certain exceptions) to
the ADP Procurement Section in Headquarters Contract (now Procurement)
Operations. PIN 79-47-1 and the August 15, 1980, memorandum cited
above advised that the initial acquisition, continued lease/rental
and conversion from lease to purchase of WPE continues to be governed
by FPR Temporary Regulation 46, Supplement 2, and FPR Subpart 1-4.11
through September 30, 1980. Temporary Regulation 46 has been cancelled
and superseded by FPR Amendment 211. The guidance provided in PIN
80-43 (interpreting Temporary Regulation 46) is hereby rescinded and
superseded. PIN 78-28 is hereby rescinded and superseded by the
delegations of procurement authority in this PIN.
Applicability: The guidance provided in this PIN 81-46 is applicable
to requirements for the acquisition of FSC Group 70 ADP and WPE and
software, ADP services, ADP-related services and maintenance. The
specific regulations for procurement of ADP and WPE are contained in
FPR Amendment 211 and FPR 1-4.11 "Procurement and Contracting Govern-
ment Wide for Automatic Data Processing Equipment, Software, Main-
tenance Services and Supplies."
EPA HO FORM tBOO-M (1-761
205
-------
Definitions: For the purpose of this PIN 81-46, the following definitions apply:
(a) Schedule - The General Services Administration (GSA) awards schedule
contracts for seme ADP items. Most of ttese contracts are nonmarriatory
ADP Schedule contracts. At present, there is one mandatory requirements
schedule contract for disc subsystems. A delivery order placed under a
GSA schedule order, or a modification thereto, is considered to be a
schedule action.
(b) Open Market - All other than "schedule" actions, including separate
contracts or purchase orders which may incorporate the terms and conditions
of schedule contracts, are considered to be "open market" actions.
The following new procurement authorities for the execution of the Amendment
211 of 41 CFR, Part 1-4 procedures for ADP and WPE apply:
Small Purchase Activities - Nationwide (Excludes HPO, RTP and Cincinnati)
0 Open Market - $10,000.00 limit
0 Schedule - $50,000.00 limit
Contract Operations - RTP and Cincinnnati
0 Open Market - up to $300,000.00 (including base and all option periods)
excluding National Computer Center
- up to $10,000.00 for National Computer Center - RTP only
0 Schedule - up to $300,000.00 purchase price (excluding National Computer
Center)
- up to $50,000.00 (purchase price) for National Computer
Center - RTP only
Contract Operations - Headquaters Procurement Operations
0 Full authority of FPR Amendment 211
0 All National Computer Center procurements over $10,000.00 open market and
$50,000.00 (purchase price) schedule procurements
The specific regulations for using General Services Administration (GSA) MSP
schedule contracts are contained in FPR 1-4.1109-6. In general the regulations
state that "the existence of non-mandatory ADP schedule contracts shall net
preclude or waive the requirement for maximum practicable competition...
Suitable -equipment must be considered whether or not this equipment is on an
ADP schedule contract." All acquisitions under a GSA Schedule contract must be
within the maximum order limitation specified in the contract. Pursuant to FPR
Amend. 211, l-4.1109-6(b)(3), the intent to place an order with an order value
in excess of $50,000.00 against an ADP Schedule contract must be synopsized at
least 15 calendar days before the order is placed. All sole-source acquisitions
206
-------
with the results of die synopsis and evidence that the use of the schedule
represents the lowest overall cost to the agency, price and other factors
considered. In this instance, a JNCP is not required. FPR 1-4.1109-6 contains
separate procedures for:
0 initial acquisition of ADPE
0 continued rental or lease of installed ADPE and software
0 conversion from lease to purchase of installed ADPE
0 acquisition of software and maintenance services
which must be followed.
The following guidance is offered for the preparation of any JNCP's required to
procure or continue lease ADPE or WPE. Such JNCP's should, as a minimum,
address the following points as appropriate:
(1) Since the accomplishment of program missions would be seriously
jeopardized by an interruption in ADP or WPE support, it is imperative
that ADP or WPE support not be interrupted when current rental/lease
arrangements expire on (insert date). Within this existing tijne constraint,
the only feasible method for avoiding interruption of ADP or WPE support
is to renew rental/lease arrangements to permit continued use of existing
equipment.
(2) Any other procurement approach would require interruption of WPE
support to accommodate: removal of old equipment; installation of new
equipment; reconfiguration of office space/Wiring to accommodate a change
of equipment; retraining of user personnel; problems of interfacing with
other equipment in use at the facility; conversion of existing stored
material onto new equipment (cite appropriate factors relevant to
the particular requirement situation); adequate time for execution of a
competitive procurement.
(3) Competitive acquisition will be employed to meet future Agency WP2
requirements. Agency wide WPE functional specifications are currently
being developed by the EPA Management Information and Data System Division
(MIDSD), but are not yet available.
All procurement requests (PR's) for ADPE, WPE, software, ADP services,
ADP-related services, and maintenance require approval by the MIDSD as
detailed in Attachment 1, entitled "ADP Procurement Approval Procedures."
The Field MIDSD Acquisition Officers identified in Appendix B of Attachment
1, will sign the PR indicating MIDSD approval of the action and forward it
to the applicable purchasing/contracting office.
This PIN is effective upon receipt.
ACTION OFFICER: Lawrence E. Sawler (PM-214), telephone 755-1303
207
-------
Attachment 1 to PIN 81-46
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
ADP Procurement Approval Procedures
For ADP Equipment, Software, Services, Related Services
and Maintenance
Applicability
These procedures apply to all procurements involving ADP
equipment, software, services, related services, and maintenance
including new procurement actions, modifications to existing
contracts, or issuance of a work assignment, task order,
directive of work (or equivalent work definition) under an
existing contract.
Definitions
The term, "ADP item", is used below to mean any or all of the
following terms: ADP equipment, software, services, related
services, and equipment maintenance. Definitions for each of
these terms are presented below in separate sections.
Background
Current guidance for the procurement and management of ADP
items is described in the FPR 1-4.11 (dated January 5, 1981) and.
the FPMR 101-35.2. It should be noted that a new Sub-part 1-4.12
is now undergoing review by Federal agencies and will supersede
the FPMR provisions and certain related temporary regulations.
Management Information and Data Systems Division (MIDSD)
The Director, MIDSD (PM-218), is responsible for ADP management
in the Agency. The director is the coordination point of contact
with the General Services Administration (GSA) for Delegation of
Procurement Authority (DPA) and with the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for ADP management issues.
Value Determination of the Procurement
The value of ADP services, related services, and maintenance
procurements is based on the per year cost. The value of ADP
equipment and software procurements is based on the total
purchase price or yearly rental price, including maintenance of
the item. Requirements must not be fragmented in order to
circumvent the established thresholds. If the procurement is to
augment existing equipment, the value of the procurement,for
purposes of determining which of the following procedures to
follow, is the total equipment value (i.e., original plus
augmentation).
208
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
Severable ADP Requirements
When the subject matter of a planned procurement is for something
other than ADP but some items are for ADP, the following
guidelines shall apply:
(1) ADP items shall be severed where operationally
feasible and procured in a separate procurement
action. The purpose of doing so is to achieve
higher quality ADP items at lower costs by
competing the work among offerers who specialize in
this highly complex and competitive technical
field. Severing the ADP items affords program,
Procurement and Contracts Management Division
(PCMD), and MIDSD management greater visibility of
this highly regulated activity. This facilitates
coordination with related activities throughout the
agency, compliance with Federal ADP regulations,
and with the specific terms and conditions of the
relevant delegation of procurement authority from
the General Services Administration (GSA). GSA has
all Federal procurement authority for ADP under
federal law. GSA has delegated some of their
authority to agencies as described in Appendix A.
(2) When the ADP items cannot be severed, the
originator must provide a written rationale for
non-severability along with the procurement
request when it is submitted for approval to MIDSD
or the designated offices in Appendix B and be
processed in accordance with these
procedures, so as to ensure compatibility with
other agency ADP activities.
Requirements Analysis and Feasibility Study Requirement
A Requirements Analysis and Feasibility Study must be performed
for all ADP procurements of equipment, software, teleprocessing
services, or development of ADP application systems. This
includes both new and continuation of requirements. Feasibility
studies are not required for operation nor maintenance of
existing ADP application systems or equipment. For those
procurements with a value of $20,000 or more for equipment or
software, or $50,000 for teleprocessing or application
development, the study must be reviewed and approved by MIDSD.
This includes initial capability and the augmentation of an
existing capability. Guidelines for performing feasibility
studies are available from MIDSD.
209
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
ADP Equipment ADPE Definition
ADP Equipment (ADPE) means general purpose, commercially
available automatic data processing ard word processing devices.
These devices are the components and the equipment systems
configured from them together with software, regardless of use,
size, capacity, or price, that are designed to be applied to the
solution or processing of a variety of problems or applications.
Included are:
(1) Digital, analog, or hybrid computers;
(2) Auxiliary equipment, such as plotters, data converison
equipment, source data automation equipment, magnetic
tape, card or cartridge typewriters, word processing
equipment, computer input/output microfilm, or memory,
either cable connected, wire connected, or stand alone,
and whether selected or acquired with a computer or
separately;
(3) Punched card machines; and
{4} Data transmission or communications, including front-end
processors, computer terminals, word processing
terminals, sensors, and other similar devices, designed
primarily for use with a configuration of ADPE.
ADP Equipment (ADPE) Approval
Restriction on New Word Processing Equipment until Award of
Agencywide Office Automation Contracts
MIDSD and Headquarters Procurement and Contracts
Management Division are working to develop, issue a
request for proposal, and award agencywide contracts
for standard office automation systems (including word
processing). No new word processing equipment will be
purchased, converted from lease to purchase, or leased
until award of the agencywide contracts. Exceptions
will be considered by MIDSD on a case-by-case basis.
Value Less Than $10,000 Purchase or Less Than $3,600 Yearly
Rental
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by a
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B). Copies of
paperwork must be forwarded to MIDSD within two weeks of
purchasing or renting.
210
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
Value Greater Than or Equal To $10,000 Purchase or Greater
Than or Equal To ?3,600 Yearly Rental
Procurement Requests (EPA form 1900) are approved by a
field MIDSD Acquisiton Officer (Appendix B) and MIDSD.
Requirements and feasibility studies must be forwarded
to MIDSD with requests for values greater than or equal
to 520,000 purchase or greater than or equal to $7,200
yearly rental.
MIDSD will forward the Procurement Requests to the
appropriate Procurement Office after ADP approval. EPA
Purchasing activity authorities are described in
Appendix A.
Software Definition
Software means pre-packaged, commercially available,
proprietary computer programs and data products specifically
designed to make use of and extend the capabilities of ADPE.
This encompasses commercially available operating systems or
applications programs, computer readable data collections; and
directly related technical assistance for installation, training,
conversion, documentation, and maintenance of the programs or
data products. This definition also includes commercially
available programs and data products for word processing
equipment as well as office automation or general purpose ADPE.
Software Approval
Value Less Than $10,000 Purchase or Less Than $3,600 Yearly
Rental
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B). Copies of
paperwork are forwarded to MIDSD within two weeks of
purchasing.
Value Greater Than or Equal To $10,000 Purchase or Greater
Than or Equal to $3,600 Yearly Rental
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by a
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B) and MIDSD.
Requirements and Feasibility Studies must be forwarded
to MIDSD with request for values greater than or equal
to $20,000 purchase or greater than or equal to $7,200
yearly rental.
211
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
MIDSD will forward the Procurement Requests to the
appropriate Procurement Office after ADP approval. EPA
Purchasing activity authorities are described in
Appendix A.
ADP Services and ADP Related Services Definition
ADP Services means the computation or manipulation of data in
support of administrative, financial, communications, scientific,
or other similar Federal Agency data processing applications. It
includes teleprocessing (including remote batch) and local batch
processing.
ADP Related Services means source data entry, conversion,
training, studies, facility management(other than for central
facilities managed by MIDSD, RTF), systems analysis and design,
programming, and equipment operations that are ancillary and
essential to agency ADP activities.
ADP Services and ADP Related Services Approval
Value Less Than $10,000
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B). Copies
of paperwork must be forwarded to MIDSD within two weeks
of purchasing.
Value Greater Than or Equal To $10,000
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by a
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B) and MIDSD.
Requirements and Feasibility Studies for ADP application
system development or teleprocessing services must be
forwarded to MIDSD with requests for values greater than
or equal to $50,000.
MIDSD will forward the Procurement Requests to the
appropriate Procurement Office after ADP approval. EPA
Purchasing activity authorities are described in Appendix
A.
ADP Equipment (ADPE) Maintenance Services Definition
ADPE Maintenance Services means those examination, testing,
repair, or part replacement functions, performed to:
(1) Reduce the probability of ADPE malfunction
(commonly referred to as "preventive maintenance"),
212
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
(2) Restore to its proper operating status a component
of ADPE that is not functioning properly (commonly
referred to as "remedial maintenance"), or
(3) Modify the ADPE in a minor way (commonly referred
to as "field engineering change" or "field
modification").
ADPE Maintenance Services Approval
Value Less Than $50,000
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B). Copies of
paperwork must be forwarded to MIDSD within two weeks of
procurement.
Value Greater Than or Equal To $50,000
Procurement Requests (EPA Form 1900) are approved by a
field MIDSD Acquisition Officer (Appendix B) and MIDSD.
MIDSD will forward the Procurement Requests to the
appropriate Procurement Office after ADP approval. EPA
Purchasing activity authorities are described in
Appendix A.
213
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
APPENDIX A: MIDSD COORDINATION OF ADP APPROVAL
MIDSD Mailing Address
All procurement requests for ADP approval and all copies of
locally approved ADP procurements are to be forwarded to:
EPA MIDSD - (PM-218)
ADP Procurement Control Officer
Washington, DC 20460
The ADP Procurement Control Officer will track all
procurements to the MIDSD approval contact, GSA and to the
appropriate procurement office.
MIDSD Approval Contacts
(1) ADP Equipment (ADPE) and Software
ADP Equipment (ADPE) and software approval has been
divided into two categories: General Purpose and Office Purpose.
General Purpose typically is for multiple users and
requires site preparation for air conditioning and humidity
control. PDP 11/70 minicomputers, central timesharing equipment
and terminals, and minicomputer terminals are included in this
category.
Office Purpose typically is for a single office use
and requires no site preparation for air conditioning and
humidity control. Word processors, desk-top computers, office
automation equipment, and their associated terminals are included
in this category.
General Purpose ADP Equipment:
Deputy Director, Data
Processing Services
Research Triangle Park, N. C.
Office Purpose ADP Equipment:
Deputy Director, Information
Systems Development
Washington, D. C.
(2) ADP Services and ADP Related Services;
Deputy Director, Information
Systems Development
Washington, D. C.
214
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures
ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
Note: Deputy Director, Data Processing Services, RTP has
approval authority for facility management services for
data centers that are managed directly.
(3) ADPE Maintenance Services;
ADPE Maintenance Services approval has also been divided
into two categories: General Purpose and Office Purpose.
Please refer to ADP Equipment for descriptions of
categories.
General Purpose ADPE Maintenance Services:
Deputy Director, Data
Processing Services
Research Triangle Park, N. C.
Office Purpose ADPE Maintenance Services:
Deputy Director, Information
Systems Development
Washington, D. C.
GSA Blanket Delegation of Procurement Authority (DPA)
The General Services Administration has all ADP
procurement authority for the federal government. GSA has
delegated the following threshold limits to agencies. MIDSD will
request delegations from GSA for procurements over the threshold
limits on a case-by-case basis.
ADPE Purchase
ADPE Yearly Rental
Software
ADPE Yearly Maintenance
ADP Services and ADP
Related Services
Sole Source
Procurement
$5 OK
18K
$5 OK
$5 OK
$5 OK
GSA Schedule
Orders
$300K
(determined by
Purchase price)
No Limit
No Limit
No Limit
Competitive
Procurement
$500K
150K
$10 OK
$200K
$300K
215
-------
MIDSD ADP Approval Procedures
ISSUE DATE 6/19/81
APPENDIX B: Field MIDSD Acquisition Officers
MIDSD has designated certain EPA positions in the field as having the
authority for giving ADP approval on specified ADP Procurements for their
offices. These locations and the positions are:
Location
( 1)
( 2)
( 3)
( 4)
( 5)
( 6)
( 7)
( 8)
( 9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Region 1, Boston, MA
Region 2, New York, NY
Region 3, Philadelphia, PA
Region 4, Atlanta, GA
Region 5, Chicago, IL
Region 6, Dallas, TX
Region 7, Kansas City, MO
Region 8, Denver, CO
Region 9, San Francisco, CA
Region 10, Seattle, WA
ERL - Cincinnati, OH
NEIC - Denver, CO
Research Triangle Park, NC
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Chief,
Deputy
(14) Washington, DC
Position
Planning & Evaluation Br.
Information Systems Br.
Information Systems Br.
ADP Management Br.
Data Processing Br.
Data Processing Br.
Data Processing Br.
Computer Systems Br.
Support Services Br.
Information and Mana.
Services Branch
Computer Services Br.
Data Services Br.
Deputy Director, Data Processing
Services, MIDSD - RTP (MD-34)
Deputy Director, Information
Systems Development, MIDSD
(PM-218)
If a field location has not been identified, there is not a field
MIDSD Acquisition Officer. All ADP procurements must then be approved
MIDSD. Please see Appendix A.
216
-------
8.20 EPA Procurement Information Notice No.
80-41-1: Procurement of Consulting
Services
217
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agencij
PftOCUftEfllENT INFORfflflTION NOTICE
No.
3UOJ • procurement of Consulting Services
Reference: i) OMB circular A-120
2) OMB Memorandum dated July 2, 1980
3) FPR 1-4.8 (FPR Amendment 207)
4) Chapters 3, 5, 14, and 17 of the CMM
PufOOSe & Scope: To adviae procurement personnel of changes in
^ * * procedures for contracting for corxsulting
services.
Discussion: i. Background
OMB Circular A-120 establishes policy, guidelines, and manage-
ment controls for the -procurement of consulting services.
Additional management controls for the procurement of
consulting services are required by OMB memorandum dated
July 2, 1980. Chapter 5 of the Contracts Management Manual
(Qfif) provides a definition, of consulting services and specifies
the procedures which-shall be followed in contracting fcr
consulting services.. FPR 1-4.8 establishes special- contracting
officer responsibilities pertaining to all procurements of
consulting services, regardless of dollar value.
2. Purpose
This PIN revises the Contracts Management Manual to provide
a new definition of consulting services and to itnpl
-------
3. Definition
Consulting services are defined as "those services of a purely
advisory nature relating to the governmental functions of
agency administration and management and agency program
management." Consulting services are usually of an intermittent
nature and are not normally obtained on a repeated or continuous
basis. These services are provided by persons and/or organizations
Who are generally considered to have knowledge and special
abilities that are not generally available within the Agency. The
services of consultants may be used to obtain outside points of
view in order to avoid too limited judgment on critical issues
or to obtain advice regarding developments in industry, university
or foundation research. Consultants provide only analysis or
advice regarding agency or program policy, strategy, performance
or organization. Consultants do not perform operating functions
or supervise the performance of operating functions. Operating
functions involve work that contributes directly to the achieve-
ment of the fundamental goals of the organization, whereas
staff or advisory functions contribute indirectly to the achieve-
ment of these goals. For those procurements in which several
different types of services are required and the primary purpose
of the procurement is to obtain services of a consulting nature,
as opposed to operationally oriented technical support services,
the procurement shall be considered as a consulting service
procurement.
Examples of consulting services, as distinguished from other
types of services, are set forth in Attachment 1 to this PIN.
These examples are provided in order to assist the Contracting
Officer in identifying When a consulting service procurement
exists.
4. Policy
It is EPA policy that: (a) consulting services shall not be
used to aid in influencing or enacting legislation or to
perform work of a policy/decision making or managerial
nature which is the direct responsibility of Agency officials;
(b) procurements of consulting services shall not be used for
the specific purpose of by-passing or undermining personnel
ceilings, pay limitations, or competitive employment procedures;
(c) procurements of consulting services shall be competitively
awarded to the maximum extent practicable; and (d) former
Government employees shall not be given preference in the
awarding of contracts for consulting services.
5. Procedures
The following required procedures have been established in
order to implement EPA'3 policy regarding the use of consulting
219
-------
services and to control the procurement of consulting services
as required by FPR 1-4.8, OMB Circular A-120, and OMB memorandum
of July 2, 1980. These procedures are applicable to all
procurement actions for nonpersonal services, including new
contracts, modifications for increases to or changes within a
contract scope of work, and orders issued under basic ordering
agreements. The Contracting Officer is responsible for assuring
that the documentation and approvals required by these procedures
are completed prior to issuing a solicitation:
a. The Contracting Officer shall review each procurement
request/requisition for the acquisition of nonpersonal services.
The Contracting Officer shall make a determination, after
consultation with the cognizant project officer, as to whether
or not the services are consulting services. The Contracting
Officer's determination shall be final. This determination
shall be in writing and shall be set forth in the form of a
"Consulting Service Determination" (see Attachment 2) filed
under item number 4 of EPA Form 1900-19, Contract Memorandum
of Transmittal and Check List.
b. If the Contracting Officer determines that the services
are consulting services, the Contracting Officer shall assure
that a justification for the use of consulting services is
obtained from the program office initiating the requirement.
This justification shall be set forth in an attachment to EPA
Form 1900-8, Procurement Request/Requisition. The Contracting
Officer shall assure that this justification includes, as a
minimum, a discussion of the following issues:
(i) The need to contract-out for these services in
lieu of using in-house capabilities. In accordance with
Chapter 5 of the CMM, the Management and Organization Division
will determine whether a requirement for management consultant
services can be met by existing Agency resources. The efforts
made by the Management and Organization Division to assess
in-house capabilities shall be documented.
(ii) The relationship or relevancy of the consulting
services to the Agency's mission. An explanation of why the
consulting services are needed and how these services will
enhance the Agency's mission shall be provided.
' (iii) Consideration of similar efforts performed in
the past. A certification that the services do not unneces-
sarily duplicate any previously performed work or services
shall be set forth in the justification. The basis upon
which this certification is made shall be included.
220
-------
(iv) Impact on annual budget request. The Agency is
required to report on the planned use of consulting services,
including planned obligations and justifications of needs,
in the Agency's formal budget request to the Office of
Management and Budget. The planned obligation for the
procurement as set forth in the budget request shall be
indicated in the justification. Whenever the estimated
value of the proposed procurement varies significantly from
the planned obligation set forth in the budget request or
in those cases where the proposed procurement for consulting
services was not reported in the budget request, an
explanation shall be included in the justification.
c. The Contracting Officer shall assure that the program
office initiating the requirement obtains the appropriate
approvals for the use of consulting services. The use of
consulting services valued at less than $50,000 shall require
the written approval of an official at a level above the
organization initiating the requirement. Written approval
for use of consulting service contracts to be awarded during
the fourth fiscal quarter shall be required at the second
level above the organization initiating the requirement when
the value of the procurement is less than $50,000. The use
of consulting services of _$50,000_ or more shall require
the written approval at the Assistant Administrator level, or
at the Regional Administrator level if the requirement is
initiated in a regional office. The signature(s) of the
authorized approving official(3), as well as the approval
of the Management and Organization Division, shall appear
in block 25, Approvals, on EPA Form 1900-8, Procurement
Request/Requisition, or in the justification for the use of
consulting services described in paragraph b. above.
d. The Contracting Officer shall assure that the
program office initiating the requirement forwards copies
of the written justification for use of consulting services
to the following offices within 10 days of approval of the
justification:
(i) Justifications for consulting services valued
at $50,000 or more - Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Management and Agency Services and the EPA Inspector General.
.(ii) Justifications for consulting services,
regardless of dollar value - Budget Preparation and Control
Branch, Budget Operations Division.
e. Justifications for noncompetitive procurements of
consulting services valued at $50,000 and above shall
require the written approval of the head of the procuring
activity. The Contracting Officer shall assure that
221
-------
justifications for noncompetitive procurements to which this
requirement applies are prepared and forwarded through appro-
priate procurement channels to the head of the procuring
activity in accordance with Chapters 3 and 17 of the CMM.
f. The Contracting Officer shall assure that the Office
of General Counsel's review and concurrence with each solici-
tation for consulting services valued at $50,000 or more and
each contract for consulting services valued at $50,000 or
more is obtained prior to issuing the solicitation and prior
to award of the contract.
g. The Contracting Officer snail assure that contracts
for consulting services include a requirement that the cover
page of all reports containing recommendations to the Agency
contain the following information:
(i) Name and business address of the Contractor;
(ii) Contract number;
(iii) Contract dollar amount;
(iv) Whether the contract was competitively or
non-competitively awarded;
(v) Name of the EPA project officer and the EPA
project officer's office identification
and location; and
(vi) Date of report.
h. The Contracting Officer shall assure that all
contract awards, excluding those awarded pursuant to small
purchase procedures, and modifications for consulting
services are coded as "MC" (Management Consultant) in data
element 52 on the data capture sheet and entered into the
Contracts Information System.
In addition to the above procedures, the Contracting Officer
shall assure that EPA Form 1900-26, Contracting Officer's
Evaluation of Contractor Performance, and EPA Form 1900-27,
Project Officer's Evaluation of Contractor Performance, are
completed for each consulting service contract regardless of
dollar value. Procedures for completing and submitting
these forms shall be in accordance with Chapter 14 of the
CMM.
This PIN is effective upon receipt and is applicable to all
procurement requests/requisitions received thereafter. PIN
80-41 is rescinded and replaced by issuance of this PIN 30-41-1
This PIN is cancelled upon publication of the above procedures
in the CMM.
ACTION OFFICER: Pamela Jones (PM-214), Telephone 755-0900
Attachments
222
-------
Attachment 1
A. Examples of services that are considered consulting
services are provided below:
1. Advice on how to implement zero based budgeting at
EPA.
2. Advice on the feasibility of instituting a transfer
pricing system in the Contracts Management Division and
advice on how such a system could improve management of
contracts by procurement personnel.
3. Analysis of EPA's management and agency services
support functions and advice on how to improve the performance
of these functions, such as through reorganization of the
Office of Mangement and Agency Services.
4. Analysis of alternative strategies for implementing
the requirements of "Superfund" regulations and advice on
resource needs associated with each alternative strategy.
5. Analysis of EPA procedures for drafting and issuing
permits to municipal and nonmunicipal dischargers and advice
on how to simplify these procedures.
6. Advice on how to coordinate and integrate toxic
substance policies and activities with those of other EPA
programs.
7. Advice on the different strategies for implementing
merit pay at EPA, and conduct of one 2-hour training course
on one of these strategies. The primary purpose of the
procurement is to provide advice on the strategies for imple-
menting merit pay.
8. External peer review of programs, projects, and
publications for the Office of Research and Development (ORD)
laboratories to assure conceptual soundness of scientific
approaches, appropriate implementation of scientific methods,
and validity of results. The objective of the procurement is
to obtain highly competent technical examinations and analyses
of the research planned or performed by ORD laboratories.
These reviews are sought from sources outside the laboratories
in order to obtain the benefit of additional viewpoints and
perspectives and 'to advise the ORD staff on the state of the
art in areas that impact laboratory research programs.
Three separate types of reviews are required:
223
-------
Attachment 1
Page 2
a. Program reviews and analyses which include
critiques of laboratory research programs and advice on
upgrading the program direction or management.
b. Project reviews and analyses which focus on
the scientific/technical details of a single project, with
an in-depth examination of the project plan and the progress
being made in pursuing the plan, a review of the data analyses
and an interpretation of the data analyses.
c. Review and analysis of research results for
publication clearance in accordance with the "ORD Technical
Information Policy and Guide."
B. Examples of services which are not considered consulting
services are provided below:
1. Regulatory impact analyses, including economic
impact analyses, of effluent guidelines on specific
industries, such as the organic chemicals industry.
2. Analyses required by the Clean Water Act to deter-
mine economically achievable standards.
3. Design and implementation of a computerized
management information system for the Office of Management
and Agency Services.
4. Development of sampling and analytical techniques
to identify and measure pollutants in the ambient air.
5. Conduct of a training course for project officers
with particular emphasis on the project officer's role in
the source evaluation and selection process.
6. Development of a manual on security procedures for
handling confidential business information.
7. Conduct of a study to assess the consequences of
pollutant loadings in the Chesapeake Bay.
8. Evaluation of the strategy proposed by the Personnel
Management Division for implementing merit pay at EPA with
the primary purpose of the procurement being the conduct of
fifteen separate 8-hour training sessions on how to draft
critical job elements and performance standards.
224
-------
Attachment 1
Page 2
a. Program reviews and analyses which include
critiques of laboratory research programs and advice on
upgrading the program direction or management.
b. Project reviews and analyses which focus on
the scientific/technical details of a single project, with
an in-depth examination of the project plan and the progress
being made in pursuing the plan, a review of the data analyses
and an interpretation of the data analyses.
c. Review and analysis of research results for
publication clearance in accordance with the "ORD Technical
Information Policy and Guide."
B. Examples of services which are not considered consulting
services are provided below:
1. Regulatory impact analyses, including economic
impact analyses, of effluent guidelines on specific
industries, such as the organic chemicals industry.
2. Analyses required by the Clean Water Act to deter-
mine economically achievable standards.
3. Design and implementation of a computerized
management information system for the Office of Management
and Agency Services.
4. Development of sampling and analytical techniques
to identify and measure pollutants in the ambient air.
5. Conduct of a training course for project officers
with particular emphasis on the project officer's role in
the source evaluation and selection process.
6. Development of a manual on security procedures for
handling confidential business information.
7. Conduct of a study to assess the consequences of
pollutant loadings in the Chesapeake Bay.
3.. Evaluation of the strategy proposed by the Personnel
Management Division for implementing merit pay at EPA with
the primary purpose of the procurement being the conduct of
fifteen separate 8-hour training sessions on how to draft
critical job elements and performance standards.
225
-------
Attachment 2
Consulting Service Determination
I hereby determine that the services described in the
procurement request/requisition (RFP No. ) are
/ / are not /_ / consulting services as defined in
FPR l-4.802(a).
(Signature)
Contracting Officer
Environmental Protection Agency
226
------- |