Docstoc

Public Disclosure Bco 23

Document Sample
Public Disclosure Bco 23 Powered By Docstoc
					       Defense Logistics Agency




     Commercial Activities Guidebook
for OMB Circular A-76 dated May 29, 2003




             August 1, 2007
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


                                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD................................................................................................................................. 1
1    INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 3
  1.1 OVERVIEW OF THE COMPETITIVE SOURCING PROCESS ........................................................ 3
  1.2 GUIDEBOOK GOALS ............................................................................................................. 5
2    ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PROGRAM BUDGET REVIEW ................................... 6
  2.1 ANNUAL INVENTORY CATEGORIES ...................................................................................... 6
           2.1.1 INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES…………...……………….……………...……..6
           2.1.2 COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES………………………………………………………...………….7
    2.2 INVENTORY PROCESS ........................................................................................................... 8
           2.2.1 DLA SUPPLEMENTAL SUMISSION REQUIREMENTS………..……………………………...…8
           2.2.2 INVENTORY CHANGES………………………………………………………………………..9
    2.3 PUBLIC REVIEW OF INVENTORY RESULTS .......................................................................... 10
    2.4 PROCEDURES FOR CHALLENGES UNDER THE FAIR ACT OF 1998 ...................................... 10
           2.4.1 FAIR ACT CHALLENGES……………………………………………………………………..9
           2.4.2 CHALLENGE DECISIONS…………………………………………………………………….10
           2.4.3 FAIR ACT CHALLENGE APPEALS………………………………………………..…………11
           2.4.4 CHANGES TO INVENTORY RESULTING FROM THE CHALLENGE PROCESS………………….11
  2.5 PROGRAM BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS................................................................................ 12
3    PRELIMINARY PLANNING ........................................................................................... 14
  3.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 14
           3.1.1 PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL………………………………………...……14
           3.1.2 COMPETITION COST ESTIMATE……………………………………………………………..14
           3.1.3 PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT………………………………………………………….15
           3.1.4 COMMUNICATIONS DURING PRELIMINARY PLANNING…………………………………….15
           3.1.5 PRELIMINARY PLANNING DECISION BRIEF…………………………………………………15
    3.2 FOURTEEN STEPS................................................................................................................ 18
           3.2.1 SCOPING…………………………………………………………………………………….17
           3.2.2 GROUPING…………………………………………………………………………………..18
           3.2.3 WORKLOAD DATA AND SYSTEMS………………………………………………..…………20
           3.2.4 BASELINE COSTING…………………………………………………………………………24
           3.2.5 SELECTION OF COMPETITION TYPE…………………………………………………………25
           3.2.6 DEVELOPMENT OF PLAN OF ACTIONS & MILESTONES……………………………..............26
           3.2.7 DETERMINING ROLES AND RESPONISBILITIES……………………………………………...26
           3.2.8 AVOIDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST………………………………………………..............31
           3.2.9 APPOINTMENT OF COMPETITION OFFICIALS……………………………………….............32
           3.2.10 DEVELOPING THE COMPETITION PLAN……………………………………………………35
           3.2.11 DEVELOPING THE TRAINING PLAN……………………………………………..………....37
           3.2.12 DEVELOPING THE COMMUNICATION PLAN………………………………………………..37
           3.2.13 NOTIFICATIONS FOR CONGRESS, CUSTOMERS, AND OTHER PARTIES………………….....39
           3.2.14 NOTIFICATION OF INCUMBANT SERVICE PROVIDERS……………………………..............40
4    PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF COMPETITION ...................................................... 41
  4.1 LABOR RELATIONS ISSUES FOR A-76 STUDIES .................................................................. 42
  4.2 RELEASE OF OTHER PUBLIC NOTICES ................................................................................ 44
5    STREAMLINED COMPETITION .................................................................................. 46

JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                      ii
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


    5.1 STREAMLINED COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS ................................................................... 46
          5.1.1 PROCESS FOR A STREAMLINED COMPETITION………………………………………...……46
          5.1.2 STREAMLINED COST PROCESS AND INFORMATION……………………………………...…47
          5.1.3 COST OF AGENCY PERFORMANCE…………………………………………………………..47
          5.1.4 SUMMARY OF THE STREAMLINED PROCESS………………………………………….……..51
    5.2 STREAMLINED COMPETITION PERFORMANCE DECISION PROCESS ..................................... 52
          5.2.1 SLCF CERTIFICATION………………………………………………………………………52
          5.2.2 SLCF REVIEW………………………………………………………………………………52
          5.2.3 IMPLEMENTING THE STREAMLINED PERFORMANCE DECISION…………………………….52
  5.3 COMMUNICATIONS DURING THE COMPETITION ................................................................. 53
6    STANDARD COMPETITION .......................................................................................... 54
  6.1 PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT DEVELOPMENT THROUGH SOLICITATION ACTIVITIES 54
          6.1.1 PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT DEVELOPMENT………………………………...……..54
          6.1.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVELLIENCE PLAN……………………………………………….56
          6.1.3 PWS DRAFT REVIEW……………………………………………………………………….56
          6.1.4 DEVELOPING THE CONTINUING GOVERNMENT ACTIVITY…………………………………57
          6.1.5 DEVELOP THE ACQUISTION PLAN…………………………………………………………..58
          6.1.6 DEVELOP THE SOURCE SELECTION PLAN…………………………………..………………59
          6.1.7 CONDUCT FORMAL PRE-SOLICITATION ACTIVITIES………………………………………..59
          6.1.8 PUBLISH SOLICITATION ANNOUNCEMENT……………………………………………….…60
          6.1.9 DEVELOP INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE………………………………………...61
          6.1.10 CONDUCT SOLICITATION ACTIVITIES……………………………………………..………61
          6.1.11 COMMUNICATIONS DURING THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS……………………………..….62
    6.2 AGENCY TENDER DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................... 66
          6.2.1 REVIEW AND UNDERSTAND PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT…………………………..67
          6.2.2 PERFORMING THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW………………………………………………….70
          6.2.3 GATHERING AND ANALYZING CURRENT COST INFORMATION…………………………….71
          6.2.4 ADJUSTING COST INFORMATION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AGENCY TENDER……...74
          6.2.5 OMB COST FACTORS……………………………………………………………………….74
          6.2.6 ENTERING INFORMATION INTO COMPARE………………………………………………..74
          6.2.7 COMPETITIVE SOURCING PROGRAM PERFORMANCE MEASURES………………………….74
    6.3 SOURCE SELECTION ........................................................................................................... 75
          6.3.1 EVALUATE PROPOSALS……………………………………………………………………..75
          6.3.2 SELECTION OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER…………………………………………………….78
          6.3.3 PERFORMANCE DECISION…………………………………………………………………...78
          6.3.4 PROTESTS…………………………………………………………………………………...79
7      POST-COMPETITION ..................................................................................................... 81
    7.1 PHASE-IN TO THE NEW SERVICE PROVIDER ....................................................................... 81
          7.1.1 IMPLEMENTING THE TRANSITION PLAN………………………………………………...…..83
    7.2   POST AWARD CONFERENCE ................................................................................................ 84
    7.3   MONITORING SP PERFORMANCE ....................................................................................... 85
    7.4   POST-AWARD PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW ................................................. 87
    7.5   MONITORING A SERVICE PROVIDER (AWARD TERM REVIEW) ........................................... 87
    7.6   LoO MODIFICATIONS ......................................................................................................... 88
    7.7   UNSATISFACTORY MEO PERFORMANCE ............................................................................ 88
          7.7.1 NOTIFICATION………………………………………………………………………………88
          7.7.2 ACTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES………………………………………………………..….89
          7.7.3 DEFAULT………………………………………………………………...………………….89


JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                  TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                  iii
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


          7.7.4 TEMPORARY REMEDIES…………………………………………………………….………89
          7.7.5 TERMINATIONS FOR REASONS OTHER THAN FAILURE TO PERFORM…………………...….90
    7.8 BEST PRACTICES AND REQUIRED REPORTS ........................................................................ 90
          7.8.1 BEST PRACTICES…………………………………………………………………………....90
    7.9 DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION EXEMPTION PROCESS ....................................... 90
          7.9.1 APPLICATION PROCEDURES……………………………………………………...…………92
          7.9.2 EVALUATION……………………………………………………………….…….…………93
          7.9.3 NOTIFICATION OF CERTIFICATION………………………………………………………….93
          7.9.4 MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS OF HPOS…………………….…………93
8      COMPETITION COST ISSUES....................................................................................... 95
    8.1 BUDGETING FOR AN A-76 COMPETITION ........................................................................... 95
    8.2 TRACKING AND MONITORING A-76 COMPETITION COSTS ................................................. 95
    8.3 DOD COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM ........................... 96
    8.4 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT OF COMPETITIONS ............................................................ 96
          8.4.1 COMPETITION COST PLAN………………………………………………………………….97
          8.4.2 PERFORMANCE METRICS DASHBOARD PROCESS……………………...…………………...97
          8.4.3 MONTHLY DASHBOARD VTC UPDATES……………………………………………………99
A APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS ....................................................... A-1
  DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................ A-1
  ACRONYMS .............................................................................................................................. A-6
B APPENDIX B―INVENTORY CODING ........................................................................... B-1
C APPENDIX C—PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL......................... C-1
D APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT ............................. D-1
E APPENDIX E―INTERVIEW GUIDE ............................................................................... E-1
F APPENDIX F—DOD BASELINE COSTING INFORMATION ......................................F-1
G APPENDIX G―TIME LIMIT WAIVER .......................................................................... G-1
H APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POAM) ............ H-1
I APPENDIX I― MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS .................................................... I-1
J APPENDIX J—NONDISCLOSURE .................................................................................... J-1
K APPENDIX K—SAMPLE TRAINING PLAN .................................................................. K-1
L APPENDIX L―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT & DECISION MEDIA RELEASES .. L-1
     L.1 SAMPLE COMPETITION ANNOUNCEMENT MEDIA RELEASE
     L.2 SAMPLE RESULTS ANNOUNCEMENT AWARDING TO CONTRACTOR DECISION
     L.3 EXAMPLE RESULTS ANNOUNCEMENT AWARDING TO MEO DECISION
M APPENDIX M—SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL/UNION NOTIFICATIONS ............. M-1
     M.1 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 STUDY
     M.2 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 TENTATIVE DECISION
     M.3 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR RIF
     M.4 SAMPLE UNION NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 AWARD DECISION
N APPENDIX N―PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE
COMPETITION IN FEDBIZOPPS ........................................................................................ N-1

JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                     iv
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


O APPENDIX O—SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT SCHEDULE ........................................ O-1
P APPENDIX P—RELEASE OF INFORMATION ..............................................................P-1
Q APPENDIX Q—SAMPLE DECISION SCHEDULE ....................................................... Q-2
R APPENDIX R—MEO LETTER OF OBLIGATION ....................................................... R-1
S APPENDIX S—SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN .................................................. S-1
T APPENDIX T—POST AWARD ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW .................................. T-1
U APPENDIX U - SAMPLE RIF NOTIFICATION…….…………………………………U-1
V APPENDIX V - DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN
REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA…………………………………….V-1
W APPENDIX W - PERFORMANCE METRIC DASHBOARD………………………..W-1
X APPENDIX X- COST TRACKING SHEET……………………………………………X-1
Y APPENDIX Y – REFERENCES………………………………………………………….Y-1




JULY 20, 2011                                                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                 v
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


FOREWORD

Competitive sourcing is the public-private competition process of the government‘s commercial
activities. The policy and procedures for defining government functions as inherently
governmental or commercial in nature are outlined in Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A-76.

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) has implemented the requirements of OMB Circular A-76
by establishing a Commercial Activities (CA) Program, which has been in place since 1998. The
CA Program is one of the tools DLA uses to increase efficiencies and reduce cost. The DLA
Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD), DLA/J-75, provides oversight for this program as well as
the coordination and approval of privatization, business case analysis and conversion to contract
initiatives. All DLA activities are required to notify the CSD prior to initiating any outsourcing
activities.

DLA recognizes the value and supports the use of competitive sourcing as a tool to help reduce
the operational costs of its commercial activities and incorporate better business practices to
provide increasingly responsive and high-quality service to our customers. Top management is
committed to ensuring that the competitive sourcing program and each competition are
conducted in the most efficient and fair manner possible and requires that each person involved
in the process be equally dedicated. DLA recognizes that the A-76 process is difficult and may
have a profound impact on the morale of our workforce. The agency is committed to assuring
both the private and the public sectors of the fairness of the process and of a level playing field.
Agency personnel must comply with all appropriate statutes, regulations, directives, and
instructions referenced in this Guidebook.

In May 2003 OMB issued a revised Circular, making significant changes to the government‘s
competitive sourcing process. This DLA Guidebook implements the May 2003, OMB Circular
A-76 and DOD guidance, and replaces the DLA Guidebook dated May 29, 2004. It is effective
immediately and is mandatory for all DLA activities; requests to deviate from the instructions
and procedures in the Guidebook must be coordinated with DLA‘s CSD. Nothing in this
Guidebook creates any legal or procedural rights for offerors, public or private, separate from
rights already given elsewhere.

A list of additional reference material is provided at the end of this Guidebook. Questions about
the Guidebook or suggested revisions should be directed to:

Defense Logistics Agency, Competitive Sourcing Division, ATTN: J-75
8725 John J. Kingman Road, Stop 6233
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6220
Email: Kenneth.McLain@dla.mil


DLA and Department of Defense components may obtain copies of this Guidebook through their
own publication channels. Copies are also available at http://www.dla.mil/j-3/A-76/A-
76Main.html.


JULY 20, 2011                                                                               FOREWORD
                                                  1
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




        Note: Throughout this document the following language rules apply:

                a) Required activities:

                       i) The Government “will”…

                       ii) The Service Provider (contractor, Agency Tender Official, Most
                       Efficient Organization) “shall”…

                       iii) The Government and the Service Provider “must”…

                b) Guidance:

                       i) The Government and/or the Service Provider “may”, “should”,
                       “could” or “can”…




JULY 20, 2011                                                                          FOREWORD
                                                2
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


1     INTRODUCTION

1.1     OVERVIEW OF THE COMPETITIVE SOURCING PROCESS

There are two methods of performing competitions under Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular A-76: streamlined and standard.

Streamlined competitions follow the process shown in Figure 1-1. The intent of the
streamlined process is to reduce the time spent on competitions while still determining the most
cost-effective way of performing the activities under competition. The A-76 Circular has
designed this process for studies of 65 full-time equivalents (FTE) or fewer. However,
Department of Defense (DOD) policy requires conducting a standard competition for those
functions that require 10 or more civilian FTEs. A streamlined competition may include the
development of a Most Efficient Organization (MEO), which is the government‘s proposal for
realizing efficiencies. The time frame for streamlined competitions is 90 calendar days. When
an MEO is developed or a solicitation is issued, a one-time extension of 45 days may be granted
by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Director as the Component Competitive Sourcing
Official (CCSO) following the A-76 Guidance. The streamlined competition process is
described further in Chapter 4.

                        Figure 1-1 Streamlined Competition Process




The standard competition process is conducted as shown in Figure 1-2. Standard competitions
must be conducted within 12 months unless an extension is granted by the Department of
Defense Competitive Sourcing Official (CSO) prior to public announcement. A standard
competition can be performed for functions with any number of FTEs but must be performed for
all competitions with 10 or more FTEs according to DOD policy. The standard competition
process is discussed further in Chapter 6.




JULY 20, 2011                                                            CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION
                                                3
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




                           Figure 1-2 Standard Competition Process




Each Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) competition will be conducted in a way that promotes
quality, timeliness, and ultimately, cost-effectiveness. To limit disruption to the DLA operations
and workforce, approved schedules should be followed as aggressively as is practical.

Applicable statutes require that any conversion of a DOD activity or function being performed
by 10 or more Department of Defense civilian employees to contractor performance must be
based on:

       A public-private competition that includes a most efficient and cost effective organization
        plan developed by such activity or function; and,
       A decreased cost of performance resulting from the competition at least equal to the
        lesser of 10 percent of the agency tender's personnel-related costs to perform the
        function or $10 million.

 There are two permanent exceptions to these requirements:

       Functions that are on the procurement list established pursuant to the Javits-Wagner-
        O'Day Act (41 United States Code (U.S.C.) 47); and,
       Functions planned to be performed by a qualified nonprofit agency for the blind or by a
        qualified nonprofit agency for other severely handicapped individuals in accordance
        with the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act.

There is also a temporary exemption under the 2007 Defense Appropriations Act (10 USC
2461/2462) for functions being performed by more than 10 Department of Defense civilian
employees that are planned to be performed by a qualified firm under at least 51 percent
ownership by an Indian tribe, as defined in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and
Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(e)), or a Native Hawaiian Organization, as defined in
section 8(a)(15) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)(15)).



JULY 20, 2011                                                             CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION
                                                 4
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


OMB Circular A-76 also requires a public-private competition to determine if government
personnel will perform a commercial activity. This requirement is applicable regardless of how
many government employees are now performing the function, including if there are less than 10
employees.

Any DLA activity that is considering using any of these exceptions or is considering converting
Commercial Activities of less than 10 DLA civilian employees will first discuss this with the
Competitive Sourcing Division.


1.2      GUIDEBOOK GOALS

This DLA Commercial Activities (CA) Guidebook for OMB Circular A-76 is intended for use
by DLA components in the development and execution of their CA competition–related
activities. The goal of this Guidebook is to provide instructions and procedures for executing
OMB Circular A-76, dated May 29, 2003.

The Guidebook is structured in chapters that correspond to the A-76 process. The chapters are as
follows:

•     Introduction
•     Annual Inventory and Program Budget Review
•     Preliminary Planning
•     Public Announcement of Competition
•     Streamlined Competition
•     Standard Competition
•     Post-Competition
•     Competition Cost Issues

Appendices are also provided for additional clarification.




JULY 20, 2011                                                           CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION
                                                5
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


2     ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PROGRAM BUDGET REVIEW

                                      A-76 Life Cycle
                                                                     Follow on
                                                                    Competition    Perform Post
                         IGCA-FAIR            Preliminary
                                                                                    Competition
                         Inventory             Planning
                                                                                   Accountability




                             Competition         Public
       Perform Team                          Announcement
         Selection                            (Official Start
                                                   Date)                          Award Contract,
                                                                                  Fee-For Service
                                                                                   Agreement, or
                                                                                   Issue Letter of
                                                                                     Obligation
       Develop PWS
      And Solicitation




                                                                                       Make
                         Develop Offers    Receive Offers                           Performance
      Issue PWS and                                              Perform Source
                          And Agency        And Agency                            Decision (Official
        Solicitation                                                Selection
                            Tender            Tender                                 End Date)




According to the requirements outlined in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular
A-76, all Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) activities are subject to competition unless
justification is provided for their being inherently governmental activities or exempt commercial
activities (CA). The criteria for designating an activity as inherently governmental or as an
exempt commercial activity are delineated later in this chapter. DLA‘s first step in determining
whether an activity is subject to competition is the development of inventories of inherently
governmental and commercial activities. This inventory process begins DLA‘s annual A-76
planning and is integrated into the agency‘s Program Budget Review (PBR).

2.1      ANNUAL INVENTORY CATEGORIES

The annual inventory of commercial and inherently governmental activities groups activities into
three broad categories: inherently governmental, commercial exempt, and commercial subject to
competition. These categories are defined in the following subsections. Figure 2-1 provides a
breakdown for these categories by Department of Defense (DOD) criteria code.




JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                  6
    DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




                                Figure 2-1 Annual Inventory Categories
                                             FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY


                                         Manpower Criteria Codes



                                                                       Legend:

                                                                     Inherently Governmental:
                                                             IG
                                                                     A, E, F, I

                                                                     Commercial Exempt:
                                                            CE       B, D, G, H, J, K, L, M

                                                                     Commercial Activities:
                                                            CA
                                                                     P, R, W, X




                                                                                                5




    2.1.1 Inherently Governmental Activities

    According to OMB Circular A-76, an inherently governmental activity is, ―…an activity that is
    so intimately related to the public interest as to mandate performance by government personnel.‖
    The circular describes inherently governmental tasks as either the exercise of sovereign
    government authority or the establishment of procedures and processes related to the oversight of
    monetary transactions or entitlements. Specifically, the circular states that these activities:

     Bind the United States to take or not take some action by contract, policy, regulation,
      authorization, order, or otherwise;
     Determine, protect, and advance economic, political, territorial, property, or other interests
      by military or diplomatic action, civil or criminal judicial proceedings, contract management,
      or otherwise;
     Significantly affect the life, liberty, or property of private persons; or
     Exert ultimate control over the acquisition, use, or disposition of United States property (real
      or personal, tangible or intangible), including establishing policies or procedures for the
      collection, control, or disbursement of appropriated and other federal funds.

    Although a position or function must meet at least one of these criteria to be considered
    inherently governmental, meeting one of the criteria does not automatically qualify a position or

    JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                       7
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


function for this designation. An additional consideration is the degree of discretion a position
involves and the extent to which that discretion is guided by established policy or government
oversight. It is possible for contractors to perform work that requires some discretion. However,
the agency for which the services are being performed will provide oversight and ensure that the
task is not inherently governmental.

2.1.2 Commercial Activities (CA)

OMB Circular A-76 defines a CA as ―…a recurring service that could be performed by the
private sector and is resourced, performed, and controlled by the agency through performance by
government personnel, a contract, or a fee-for-service agreement.‖ By definition, these activities
are not so closely tied to the public interest that they require performance by government staff.

2.1.2.1 Exempt Commercial Activities

Some commercial activities are exempted from private sector performance pursuant to a written
determination by the Component Competitive Sourcing Official (CCSO) or are performed by
government personnel because of a statutory prohibition against private sector performance. For
example, an exemption is made to maintain government personnel in positions where continuity
of infrastructure operations is required, and to allow for civilian and military career progression.

2.1.2.2 Commercial Activities Subject to Competition

A CA subject to competition is not so intimately related to the public interest that it requires
performance by a government employee. A competed CA can be performed within, throughout,
or in support of organizations that perform classified or inherently governmental work.

2.2     INVENTORY PROCESS

As stated in the Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act, agencies are required to submit
an inventory to OMB for review and approval by June 30 of each calendar year. The submission
includes an inventory of Commercial Activities performed by government personnel, an
inventory of inherently governmental activities performed by government personnel, and an
inventory summary report. According to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Guide to
Inventory Submission, DLA must submit its inventory to Housing and Competitive Sourcing,
Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment)
[ODUSD(I&E)] by March 15 of each calendar year. ODUSD(I&E) then consolidates all DOD
inventories into a single submission to OMB to meet the June 30 deadline.

The inventory process enables DLA to determine which positions are most appropriate for a CA
public-private competition. DLA designates which positions are covered by the A-76
competition procedures. DLA‘s Competitive Sourcing Division, J-75, serves as the DLA FAIR
Act Program Manager, and is responsible for the agency‘s inventory process. After refining and
consolidating inventory submissions from within the agency, J-75 presents the inventory results
to the Corporate Board or A-76 Program Executive Steering Group in February. The DLA
Director, as the CCSO, then approves the inventory submission and the summary report before
they are forwarded to OSD.


JULY 20, 2011                                                 CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                 8
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


2.2.1 DLA Supplemental Submission Requirements

Inventories are conducted annually in accordance with OMB Circular A-76, the OSD Guide to
Inventory Submission, and supplementary DLA guidance as established by J-75. Typically, J-75
requires inventory and narrative submissions from all field activities and major staff elements by
or around December 15.

The inventory must identify end-of-fiscal-year full-time equivalent (FTE) manpower
authorizations that are (1) inherently governmental (IG), (2) exempt from private sector
performance (CE), or (3) subject to review for divestiture or private sector performance (CA).
The inventory is also used to report military manpower activities that can be converted to
performance by DOD civilians or the private sector. DLA organizations should (1) include in
their inventories all appropriated funded military (Active and Reserve Component) and DOD
civilian manpower (U.S. and foreign national) and (2) exclude manpower paid through non-
appropriated funds and services obtained through contracts with the private sector and through
interservice and intragovernmental support agreements. Significant budget differences will be
explained in the DLA organization‘s narrative, along with any significant coding changes. DLA
organizations‘ narratives should follow the format described in the OSD Guide to Inventory
Submission. Inventory submissions are made in Microsoft Excel format.

2.2.1.1 Inventory Spreadsheets

Major staff elements should use separate spreadsheets for field activities that report their
inventories directly to the staff element, rather than rolling all the element‘s FTEs into a single
spreadsheet on its inventory submission. For example, J-6 should have a separate worksheet for
the Document Automation and Productions Services (DAPS). This requirement does not apply
to primary level field activities.

Major staff elements should roll their lower level staff FTEs into a single spreadsheet. For
example, J-1 should submit one spreadsheet for J-1, J-12, J-14, and J-16. Spreadsheet
requirements can be found in Appendix B.

2.2.1.2 Inventory Coordination

Major staff elements assist in the inventory review, especially for field activities directly under
their jurisdiction or field activities receiving staff guidance from them.
Field activities under the operational jurisdiction of J-3/4 submit their inventories and narratives
to the Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD) for review before submission to the DLA FAIR Act
Program Manager. These field activities are the DDC, DESC, DRMS, DSCC, DSCP, DSCR,
DLA-C, DLA-E, and DLA-P
Field activities under the operational jurisdiction of J-6 submit their inventories and narratives to
J-65 for review before submission to the DLA FAIR Act Program Manager. These field
activities are J6B/DLIS, DAPS, and DAASC.
DNSC submits its inventories and narratives to DES for review before submission to the CSD,
J-75.

JULY 20, 2011                                                 CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                  9
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Organizations should not send drafts to the DLA FAIR Act Program Manager to meet the DLA
suspense. Only copies approved by the organization‘s commander or director will be accepted.

2.2.2 Inventory Changes

If an organization must change its inventory after it has been submitted to the DLA FAIR Act
Program Manager, the organization point of contact should obtain a reviewed and ―scrubbed‖
copy from the DLA FAIR Act Program Manager and make changes to that copy. Changes to the
inventory should be highlighted in yellow, and a narrative should accompany the revised
submission explaining each change. J-75 will establish a cut-off date for any changes beyond the
December submission, and any changes submitted after that point will not be made until the next
fiscal year‘s inventory.

2.3     PUBLIC REVIEW OF INVENTORY RESULTS

After OMB has reviewed the inventory and consulted with DLA [through DUSD(I&E)]
regarding its submission, OSD will make the approved inventory available to Congress and the
public via its FAIRNet Web portal, located at http://web.lmi.org/fairnet/. OMB will then issue a
notice of availability in the Federal Register so that any interested party can review the inventory
and file an inventory challenge.

2.4     PROCEDURES FOR CHALLENGES UNDER THE FAIR ACT OF 1998

2.4.1 FAIR Act Challenges

To be considered valid, a challenge must meet all of the requirements in paragraphs 1 through 10
below. Challenges that do not meet all of these requirements will be rejected. Challengers are
encouraged to familiarize themselves with the FAIR Act of 1998 and OMB Circular A-76.

1. The challenge must be in writing. Challenges made through telephone calls, oral inquiries,
   voice mail, and e-mail are not acceptable and will be rejected.

2. The challenge must be sent by U.S. mail, express delivery or similar service, or fax
   transmission to DLA‘s Competitive Sourcing Branch (J-75). (Note: To assist in processing,
   challengers should write ―FAIR Act Challenge‖ on the envelope). The challenge may also
   be delivered in person if the person making the delivery is authorized access to the office
   listed under Component Address to Receive Challenges. Challenges sent or delivered to
   other offices or locations will be rejected.

3. The challenge must be submitted to DLA‘s Competitive Sourcing Branch (J-75) within 30
   working days after the date on which the OMB notice stating that the DOD inventory is
   available to the public first appears on FedBizOpps.gov. When the OMB notice appears, the
   inventory is available to interested parties through the DOD FAIRNet Web portal and in
   reading rooms in the Washington, DC, area.

4. The person or organization making the challenge must be an interested party. Interested
   parties are defined in the FAIR Act of 1998 as:


JULY 20, 2011                                                CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                10
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


a.  A private source that:
    i. is an actual or prospective offeror for a contract, or other form of agreement, to perform
       the activity; and
   ii. has a direct economic interest in performing the activity that would be adversely affected
       by a determination not to procure the performance of the activity from a private sector
       source.
b. A representative of any business or professional association that includes within its
    membership private sector sources referred to in paragraph (a).
c. An officer or employee of an organization within an executive agency that is an actual or
    prospective offeror to perform that activity.
d. The head of any labor organization referred to in section 7103(a) (4) of Title 5, United
    States Code, that includes within its membership officers or employees of an organization
    referred to in paragraph (c).

5. The challenge must explain why the challenger qualifies as an ―interested party.‖

6. Members of the Uniformed Armed Forces and their Reserve and National Guard components
   do not qualify as interested parties.

7. The challenge must identify the activity being challenged as specifically as possible; that is,
   it must describe the activity being challenged so that DLA can identify it. For example, for
   challenges to activities included in the inventory, the challenger may reference the inventory
   entry, or the challenger may provide activity, function, organization, location, state, or other
   identifying information for challenges to activities that were excluded from the inventory.

8. The challenge must state whether the challenger is challenging (1) the decision to include the
   activity on the DOD FAIR Act inventory as a CA, (2) the decision to exclude the activity
   from the DOD FAIR Act inventory as an ―inherently governmental function,‖ or (3) a
   decision regarding an OMB reason code designation. Only these three decisions are subject
   to challenge. Attempts to challenge other items on the DOD inventory or other decisions
   related to the inventory will be rejected.

9. The challenge must state the reason or reasons for the challenge; that is, it must explain why
   the challenger believes DLA should change (1) its decision to include the activity on the
   DOD inventory list as a CA, (2) its decision to exclude the activity from the list as an
   inherently governmental function, or (3) its decision regarding an OMB reason code
   designation.

10. The challenge must include the name of the challenger and the address to which the decision
    on the challenge should be sent.

2.4.2 Challenge Decisions

A decision on a challenge will be made within 28 working days from the date on which DLA‘s
Competitive Sourcing Branch (J-75) receives the challenge.

The decision will be in writing and will:

JULY 20, 2011                                                CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                11
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


•     Identify the activity and the omission/inclusion decision or reason code designation being
      challenged
•     State whether the challenge is rejected on procedural grounds, is upheld, or is denied
•     Explain the rationale for the decision
•     Provide an explanation of the challenger‘s appeal rights if the challenge has been rejected or
      denied

DLA‘s J-7 Director will decide whether to reject, uphold, or deny a challenge. Decisions will be
transmitted to challengers by U.S. mail or fax.

2.4.3 FAIR Act Challenge Appeals

The specific procedures for submitting an appeal to a decision on a challenge that is rejected or
denied will be provided to the challenger in the decision letter. Appeals will be in writing and
transmitted by U.S. mail, express mail delivery or other similar service, or fax transmission. The
written appeals may also be delivered in person to the DLA Office of General Counsel as the
Office Designated to Receive Appeals, if the person making the delivery is authorized access to
the Office Designated to Receive Appeals. To assist in processing, appellants should write
―FAIR Act Challenge Appeal‖ on the envelope. Appeals will be submitted to the designated
office within 10 working days after the challenger receives the decision denying or rejecting the
challenge. Decisions on appeals will be in writing and will state the determination and its
rationale.

2.4.4 Changes to Inventory Resulting From Challenge Process

If the challenge process results in a change in the submitted inventory, the DLA will (1) transmit
a copy of the change to DUSD (I&E), OMB, and Congress; (2) make such changes available to
the public; and (3) publish a notice of public availability on FedBizOpps.gov.

2.5       PROGRAM BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS

The Program Budget Review (PBR) process for A-76 is addressed annually as part of the overall
agency PBR process managed by DLA Financial Operations (J-8). The PBR A-76 Guidance
directs DLA activities to:

         Review A-76 schedules, assumptions, and spreadsheets;
         Understand the relationship of assumptions to the FAIR Act Inventory and any
          Management Initiative Directives;
         Ensure savings numbers are embedded in their PBR costs; and
         Not deviate from the Guidance without prior approval of the Director, Acquisition
          Management (J-7)
The PBR A-76 Guidance has three attachments:

         Attachment 1 – Schedules for the announcement and completion of A-76 competitions;

JULY 20, 2011                                                  CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                                  12
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


       Attachment 2 – Competition implementation costs and savings for DLA activities to use
        in their PBR submissions; and,
       Attachment 3 – Assumption used in determining the costs and savings in Attachment 2


The PBR A-76 Guidance draft is initially prepared by the CSD in November and is used by field
activities and major staff elements in the development of their individual PBR submissions,
which are normally due in February/March of the following year. For more detailed information
on the PBR process, activities are directed to contact DLA Financial Operations (J-8).




JULY 20, 2011                                             CHAPTER 2—ANNUAL INVENTORY AND PBR
                                              13
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


3      PRELIMINARY PLANNING

                                          A-76 Life Cycle
                                                                        Follow on
                                                                       Competition
                                                                                      Perform Post
                             IGCA-FAIR            Preliminary
                                                                                       Competition
                              Inventory            Planning
                                                                                      Accountability




                                 Competition         Public
     Perform Team                                Announcement
       Selection                                  (Official Start
                                                      Date)                          Award Contract,
                                                                                     Fee-For Service
                                                                                      Agreement, or
                                                                                      Issue Letter of
                                                                                        Obligation
           Develop
     Develop PWS PWS
          and Solicitation
    And Solicitation




                                                                                          Make
                             Develop Offers    Receive Offers                         Performance
    Issue PWS and                                                   Perform Source
                              And Agency        And Agency                           Decision (Official
      Solicitation                                                     Selection
                                Tender            Tender                                End Date)



3.1 GENERAL

Preliminary planning for competitive sourcing is critical to ensuring that each competition is
properly aligned with the Defense Logistics Agency‘s (DLA) strategic goals and mission
requirements. Extensive preliminary planning is required for all potential A-76 competitions.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76 requires that such planning be
conducted before the announcement of a competition so that once the competition begins, efforts
can be focused exclusively on developing the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the Most
Efficient Organization (MEO) document. Preliminary planning, as described in the Circular,
includes both overall strategic planning and individual competition preparation. Prior to
preliminary planning, roles and responsibilities for this process need to be created within the
Required Activity (RA). The assigned roles will show a clear delineation of responsibility
during this important step.

Competitive sourcing as described in Circular requires significant upfront planning with a 9-step
process to be completed prior to announcement. However, DLA has 5 additional steps to ensure
all potential competitions are aligned with the internal DLA strategic goals and mission, as well
as thoroughly prepare for the competition. These 14 steps will be completed prior to the
announcement of a competition (see Section 3.2 for more information).

The A-76 Contracting Support Office (DSCC-DR) is a required participant in the early stages of
preliminary planning, especially in the scoping and grouping activities. The contracting office

JULY 20, 2011                                                             CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                        14
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


will conduct market research activities in conjunction with preliminary planning to ensure that
the competition (acquisition) is ―packaged‖ appropriately. This is to ensure that the competition
is procurable and does not unnecessarily limit competition. Therefore, before the enterprise
determines that a competition should be local/regional/national or be single or multi-function, the
contracting office should review the functions and any initial scoping and grouping information,
conduct market research, and make recommendations to the requiring activity to ensure that the
competition will result in at least two offers.

Several documents are required to be completed by the end of preliminary planning to include
the Competition Plan (see 3.2.10); an initial cost estimate (see 3.1.2); a Preliminary Planning
Decision Briefing (see 3.1.5); and the Preliminary Planning Report (see 3.1.3), which is required
to be posted on the A-76 contracting web site along with the solicitation and other documents
relative to the competition.

3.1.1 Preliminary Planning Assessment Tool

Note: Preliminary planning is required for the follow-on competitions as well as initial
competitions, but typically can and should be accelerated. The fourteen steps for preliminary
planning do not necessarily have to be performed for follow-on competitions, but an analysis
will be completed with the contracting office to determine which steps are required. Prior to the
end of the last performance period, the Requiring Activity (RA) will review the existing PWS (or
solicitation) and workload to determine necessary scope and workload changes, if any, and
coordinate with the contracting officer for the acquisition strategy, and other pertinent steps
necessary to release the follow-on solicitation (i.e. hire contractor help, etc.).

The Preliminary Planning Assessment Tool, shown in Appendix C, is a tool to ensure that all
Preliminary Planning steps are followed and accomplished. The form is initiated at the outset of
the preliminary planning process and updated throughout the process. The Preliminary Planning
Assessment Tool should be completed before a competition‘s public announcement. Although
this is not considered an official output, the RA, the KO, and the CSD should use the assessment
tool to determine when an initiative is ready for public announcement. The preliminary planning
phase should be accomplished within a reasonable time frame. Twelve months is a typical
estimate for a standard competition. The time can be more or less, depending on the complexity
of the functions, such as information operations, or multifunction, multi-location activities. It is
crucial that all required preliminary planning actions be performed thoroughly so that the limited
time allotted for completing competitions after announcement can be used wisely.

3.1.2 Competition Cost Estimate

In addition to completing the Preliminary Planning Assessment Tool, an initial estimate on the
cost to conduct the proposed competition is provided by the Defense Logistics Agency‘s (DLA)
Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD) at the beginning of the Preliminary Planning Period. The
RA should provide subsequent updates that should include applicable estimates from the
Contracting Office at DSCC-DR, the Contracting Officer (KO), Headquarters (HQ), and any
anticipated consultant support. Progress and cost updates will be discussed during regularly
scheduled Video Teleconferences (VTC). Chapter 8 provides more detailed information on cost,


JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                15
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


schedule, and performance metric updates. If major issues or complications arise before
scheduled updates, they should be brought to the CSD‘s attention immediately.

3.1.3 Preliminary Planning Report

The Preliminary Planning Report (PPR) details the results of the Preliminary Planning team‘s
planning which describe activities, findings and/or recommendations to ensure the fourteen steps
were completed. It provides information needed by senior management on whether to go
forward or not with the competition The report‘s information is utilized for proper alignment of
each competition with internal strategic goals and mission of the Requiring Activities and DLA
as a whole. The PPR also prepares the Activity Under Competition for the competition phases
and associated activities. Additionally, the PPR is a means to encapsulate all of the competition
information for the announcement decision briefing to the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE).
A sample Preliminary Planning Report is available in Appendix D.

3.1.4 Communications During Preliminary Planning

During the planning stage, the Activity Under Competition and Requiring Activity CA Program
Manager should plan a series of meetings with a variety of management levels within DLA and
the major customers. DLA HQ Customer Support representatives, as applicable, will be afforded
the opportunity to review the communication plan and participate in the meetings with
customers. Early meetings should be conducted with senior level management to provide an
overview of the functions to be studied, efforts that will be taken to ensure continued mission
accomplishment during and after the competition, and any potential impacts. When relevant,
current Interservice Support Agreement providers should be notified of the upcoming
competition.

Requiring Activities should consider developing a separate customer awareness or customer
communication plan if there is a large number or broad variety of customers, or if the A-76
competition is expected to result in large-scale changes to the way the customer is accustomed to
receiving service. DLA‘s customers should be encouraged to provide input to the performance
requirements and to the evaluation of offerors. More importantly, they should be made to
understand the purpose and the timing of the competitions and should be aware of the potential
changes in the way they will receive services. They need to know that A-76 will not negatively
impact the relationship with either the agency or the service that they depend on DLA to provide.
In much the same way that the workforce and internal stakeholders are kept informed through an
internal communication plan, the customers should also be provided relevant and timely
information about the upcoming competition. The time to do this is as early as possible, but
certainly before the request for proposals is issued. When accomplished early enough, this
would be a prime opportunity to gain the customers‘ buy-in of the process, to gain their
commitment to provide input into the performance requirements, and to provide personnel to
assist in the evaluation of offers, if needed. The customer awareness process should include
briefings and meetings at local, major command, and component levels.




JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                               16
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


3.1.5 Preliminary Planning Decision Briefing

Once the Preliminary Planning phase activities complete Step 12 of the DLA Preliminary
Planning process, a decision briefing to the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) is required.
The objectives of the briefing are to (1) demonstrate the Preliminary Planning team is ready to
complete the final two steps of the Preliminary Planning process and (2) obtain approval from
the SPE to proceed with announcing the A-76 competition. The briefing highlights the outcomes,
decisions, and obstacles overcome during the Preliminary Planning process.

Because the Preliminary Planning phase is a collaborative process requiring numerous DLA
activities and officials providing analyses regarding the functions proposed for study, the
briefing should include the impact to or by others outside the Requiring Activity on Preliminary
Planning. The actions and information from the supporting organizations and how the
information was incorporated into the final decisions should be included in this part of the
briefing. Other information necessary for the briefing are the anticipated difficulties that may be
faced by the team. Significant issues such as establishing Workload Data Systems or requesting
an extension to complete the competition and other informative issues should be brought to the
attention of the SPE.

The briefing should be developed utilizing information, findings and resources prepared and
recorded in the Preliminary Planning Assessment Tool. The Assessment Tool enables consistent
documentation of Preliminary Planning decisions and outcomes from function analysis, cost
figures, market research and study developments. Eight steps of the Preliminary Planning
process are built into the Assessment Tool, which should be considered a ―living document‖ by
which the Preliminary Planning team records and certifies their activities on a consistent and
auditable document trail. The Assessment Tool provides an excellent platform on which to
develop the decision briefing presentation.

Another important reporting tool to be utilized in coordination with the Assessment Tool is the
Baseline Cost Estimate. This cost estimate will be prepared as part of the presentation briefing
to the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) to aid in the decision to complete Preliminary
Planning activities and proceed to announcement.

Personnel on the Preliminary Planning team that are responsible for providing the brief are the
Preliminary Planning team lead and a representative of the Requiring Activity. The SPE is
responsible for making the decision to carry forward, to direct the team to revisit steps of
Preliminary Planning, or inquire on alternative sourcing methods in lieu of conducting the study.
A complete a picture of the team‘s actions is required for the SPE to make a decision supporting
announcement.

Read-ahead documents will be forwarded to the SPE as least one day prior to the briefing
presentation. Once the SPE has signed off on the briefing the Preliminary Planning process can
continue to Step 13 of the process.

        Best Practices Tip: The Preliminary Planning Report (PPR) and Baseline Cost
        Estimate (BCE) can be effective tools in creating the foundation on which to build the
        Preliminary Planning Briefing.

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                17
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




3.2                                      FOURTEEN STEPS



                                        DLA 14 Steps of A-76 Preliminary Planning Process
                                                                                                            Management
                                                 Activity Analysis                                                                                             Closing Tasks
  A-76 Program Budget Review Guidance




                                                                                                                     Avoid




                                                                                                                                                                                                    Public Announcement
                                                                                                                   Conflicts of
                                                                                                                                                                 Inform
                                                                                                                    Interest
                                                                                                               8
                                                                                                                                                              Incumbents
                                                          1
                                                                                                                                                          14
                                                              Determine                           7
                                                               Scope                                Determine                  Appoint
                                                                                                     Roles &                  Competition
                                                                                                  Responsibilities              Officials                 Congressional,
                                                                                                                             9                              Customer
                                                                                                                                                             & Other
                                         2                                      3                                                                          Notification
                                                                         Analyze
                                              Group                                                                                                       13
                                                                       Workload &
                                             Activities                                                                      10
                                                                      Data Systems




                                                                                                                                                                  YES
                                                                                                                               Develop
                                                                                                       Develop                Competition
                                                                                                      Competition                Plan
                                                                                                       Schedule




                                                                                                                                                                                  Alternative
                                                                                                  6                                                         Preliminary
                                                                                                                                                          Planning Report
                                                                                                                                                                and          NO
                                                                                                                             11
                                                                                                                                                          Briefing to SPE
                                                                                                                                Develop
                                                                                                                              Training Plan
                                                              Determine             Determine                                                 12
                                                              Baseline              Competition                                                  Develop
                                                                Costs                  Type                                                   Communication
                                                          4                     5                                                                 Plan



                                                In addition to OMB’s 9 steps, DLA has 5 additional requirements
                                             OMB Circular Requirement                                                                          DLA’s Additional A-76 Steps


                                                                                                                                                                                                1



                                         Note: Preliminary Process allows for flexibility in the 14 Step Process

3.2.1 Step 1 – Scoping

The first step in preliminary planning under the Circular is determining the scope of the
competition. This includes determining the activities (or functions) and the full-time equivalents
(FTE) to be included. First, however, the approved IGCA inventory will be reviewed to ensure
that the categorizations of the activities are accurate and up to date. If any incorrect
categorizations are discovered during the analysis of the inventory, the RA should recommend
any necessary changes to the Competitive Sourcing Division (J-75). The most effective way of
performing the inventory validation is on-site focus group interviews. These interviews provide
a clear and descriptive view of the functions considered for competition. In addition to these
interviews, positions considered for competition should be reviewed. This position analysis
requires collection and review of position descriptions for the activities under competition to
determine whether they are commercial or inherently governmental. At the completion of the

JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                            CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                                                                             18
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


position description analysis and the on-site interviews, the FAIR Act inventory should be
validated. Once the review of the FAIR Act inventory has occurred, current policies and
directives should be collected and analyzed for applicability to potential competitions. It is also
important to collect all relevant service contracts related to the function or activity. Collecting
these contracts will provide a better picture of the overall level of effort and workload expended
in the function.

These scoping exercises should help in determining which functions or parts of functions should
be (in scope) or should not be (out of scope) included in the competition and which require
further research.

After the initial identification of candidate functions, various factors should be considered to help
in selecting the functions for competition. These factors should include planned competition
costs versus potential savings; the timing of the competition in relation to other organizational
activities; potential efficiencies to be realized through competition; and possible mission
degradation. An evaluation of whether the function could be performed by a small or a small
and disadvantaged business may also be helpful. Considering these factors enables development
of an accurate picture of the functions most suitable for competition. However, these factors
(either individually or collectively) should not be used as the sole basis for excluding a function
from competition or authorizing its inclusion.

        Best Practices Tip: When determining the scope of a competition, an important
        step is determining whether a comparable function is currently performed by the
        private sector, then probing the level of interest among industry leaders. If little
        or no interest exists, it may be necessary to evaluate a new function or group
        functions to increase the likelihood of receiving offers.

3.2.2 Step 2 – Grouping

The second step in the preliminary planning phase of the competitive sourcing process is
grouping. In this phase, the activities identified as eligible for a competition are subdivided or
consolidated into groups, which will be separately competed. For example, if the overall scope
of a competition comprises the administrative functions of an organization, these functions may
be competed by geographic area, by department, or in some other logical fashion. Conversely,
like functions across DLA may be consolidated and competed together. The activity under
competition, the RA Commercial Activities (CA) Program Manager, the KO, and the affected
organization‘s senior management should discuss all issues surrounding the activity to be
competed. This discussion should include identification of the elements of the organization that
perform the work under competition and the associated groups that interact with and support the
organization. The discussion also should determine which service contracts should be included
in the competition. Functions should be grouped in such a way that the product or service
produced by the activity is adequately maintained and can be performed by any service provider
(SP).

The activity under competition should consider a competition‘s potential effects on the internal
and external groups that support the command. The impact of consolidating service contracts
into the scope of the new acquisition should also be considered. In addition, the requirements of

JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                 19
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


non-appropriated fund employees, interservice support agreements (ISSA), memorandums of
agreement (MOA), and memorandums of understanding (MOU) should be reviewed to
determine their most appropriate placement (inside or outside the activity under competition) and
to develop a rationale for inclusion of the particular group of functions for competition. The RA
should then communicate the competition‘s potential impact to the affected organizations.

The funding source for each function -- working capital fund, non-appropriated fund, or any
other kind of "special" fund -- should be identified early in preliminary planning since it may
affect how functions are grouped. If separate portions of functions are funded by more than one
source of funding, either because they are at different activities or are functions to be grouped
together that currently are not grouped together, then consideration should be given to the time
frame and implications of changing the funding source.

Public reimbursable source agreements provided by a host command or another reimbursable
activity should be included in the scope of work, particularly when the service has a major
impact on the performance of the function. Examples of public reimbursable source agreements
include those agreements usually outside of DOD, such as between Fairfax County, Virginia and
Ft. Belvoir for water/sewage treatment, or between the activity and the local, state and federal
government. Requirements that are outside the activity under competition will also be
considered. Review and appropriate placement of inherently governmental responsibilities
(performance assessment, contract administration, etc.) will also occur. These determinations
will improve the accuracy of the information released at public announcement and throughout
the procurement process.

For all acquisitions, market research is required to obtain information relevant to the grouping of
functions and the needs and requirements of the potential acquisition. Market research also can
be used to develop the business and acquisition strategies employed once the competition has
begun. The acquisition strategy is developed on the basis of requirements within the
competition. These requirements are the factors that will be considered as the strategy is
developed and may help determine the type of contract and possible contract line item number
(CLIN) structures for future use. Recommendations will be based on market research into the
decisions and outcomes reached by other similar government agencies. Grouping will also
comply with the requirements of 32 CFR §169a.17 and the bundling criteria of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and the Competition in Contracting Act.

The collection of market research is a typical pre-solicitation activity and is used to conduct
exchanges with potential offerors and industry experts. These exchanges can help the
government learn how the activity under competition is actually performed in the private sector.
Direct telephone and mail solicitation and advertising on FedBizOpps.gov, in newspapers; in
trade journals are useful for developing industry interest and obtaining input to the PWS
development process. Literature and internet searches are other ways of obtaining market
information.

The information learned in market research can be used in preparing the PWS and developing
the performance standards and other aspects of the solicitation.



JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                20
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


        Best Practices Tip: Key factors to consider in grouping functions are how closely
        the functions are tied to the agency’s core mission and whether other
        transformation or reorganization initiatives are taking place within the agency.

3.2.3 Step 3 – Workload Data and Systems

Once a competition has been grouped, the activity under competition will collect and analyze
workload data which will serve as the basis for the Performance Work Statement (PWS).
Workload data provides the amount of effort, outputs and services that the Agency Tender and
the competition will be using to develop competition bids. The workload data identifies all work
units and quantifiable outputs of activities or processes of the function under an A-76
competition.

Workload Data collection systems can vary from organization to organization as well as the
language and processes used by the personnel that manipulate data within the system.
Differences in calculating workload outcomes and services can often lead to difficulties in
defining workload systems when large, multi-organizational functions are bundled together for a
competition. Defining the workload system during the Preliminary Planning phase establishes a
commonality for language if defining systems is required. Identifying and developing
commonality of system usage provides accountability of the Preliminary Planning team‘s
understanding of the functions under study.

Another important reason to capture workload data systems is the application of market research
activities during the Preliminary Planning phase. Market research should reveal valuable data
for bid preparation and assist in establishing performance standards that are universal to a
function. Based on research of similar activities or organizations an approach for gathering
workload data is useful to a study that may not have an established system. If an activity does
not have a well defined workload data gathering system a Data Collection Plan will need to be
developed. Included in the plan is the approach for data collection, points of contact for data,
defining the data to be collected and describing the system itself. If a data capturing system is
not available the Preliminary Planning team will implement a system for collecting workload
indicators and figures. Workload data systems can be as simplistic as a log book or a tick sheet
once common workload indicators are agreed to by the Preliminary Planning team. Data
gathering systems can be as complex as procuring a software system and utilizing the software
applications and support services to begin accounting for workload.

3.2.3.1 Assessment
Prior to collecting data, the activity under competition will assess all existing workload data and
potential data collection capabilities. If there are no sources for such data or if the available
sources do not provide complete data, methods for collecting such data should be developed and
planned.

Primary and secondary tasks, processes, and outputs for the activity under competition will be
accurately identified. This information will form the basis for all further workload data
collection. DLA and industry performance standards for these tasks should also be researched.



JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                21
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Some possible sources for this information are information system databases, logbooks, reports,
previous competition findings, interviews, and technical estimates.

        Best Practices Tip: Market research can be a valuable tool for assessing the
        types of data and the collection techniques needed to assist in offer preparation,
        evaluation of prospective offerors’ proposals, and development of phase-in
        requirements and staffing strategies.

The OMB Circular A-76 requires data collection and analysis during preliminary planning in
order to allow sufficient time to get a Request for Proposal (RFP) on the street within the 12 and
18 month time constraints.

3.2.3.2 Data Collection and Analysis
Data collection and analysis in the standard competition are based on the results of the workload
data analysis performed in the preliminary planning phase of the process. The results of this
earlier analysis should indicate what data is needed, how it will be used, who may have it, and
how to obtain it efficiently.

(1) Perform Initial Data Gathering

        Data collection should focus on:

           Obtaining organizational charts and listings of all positions and employees under
            competition
           Obtaining mission statements for activity under competition
           Identifying how the various functions are currently funded; i.e., the ―color‖ of money
            – working capital fund, non-appropriated fund, customer reimbursement
           Collecting data on how the organization is currently operating (see Workload section
            of the Performance Work Statement [PWS] for help in arriving at a baseline full-time
            equivalent [FTE] count)
           Identifying workload indicators (what is being counted); this should be accomplished
            before collection of workload and workyear data
           Evaluating the approach to be used in collecting workload and workyear data (i.e.,
            how data will be collected, what systems exist, how information is stored); this
            should be accomplished before the information is requested
           Presenting PWS data collection methodology to supervisors, subject matter experts
            (SME), and work leads for validation
           Maintaining an audit trail of information; detailed records should be kept of where
            specific data came from (who, when, etc.) to prepare for any potential challenges
(2) Gather Data through Subject Matter Expert Interviews


JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                22
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


        Interviews are critical to PWS and Most Efficient Organization (MEO) development.
        These interviews can be conducted with both internal and external sources. Internal
        sources are typically activity personnel at all levels, such as supervisors, work leaders,
        and functional employees. Typical external sources include customers, Defense Logistics
        Agency (DLA) Headquarters (HQ), and public reimbursable providers.

        Workforce interviews help to ensure the accuracy of the data collected and to secure
        workforce buy-in to the A-76 process. Every effort should be made to collect the most
        reliable information. To ensure the continuity and consistency of the key questions,
        interview guides should be established; however, the interviewer should also always
        remain flexible (see Appendix E).

        Group interviews, or focus groups, also can be an effective tool. The primary
        consideration for these interviews is achieving representative participation of employees
        affected by the competition. Group interviews can be used to validate generic data,
        validate individual interview data, and review draft documentation.

(3) Perform Organizational Analysis

        The preliminary planning team should review the current organizational structure and
        identify the services it provides. Organizational analysis will allow the preliminary
        planning team to understand the mission of the activity under competition, as well as the
        activity‘s current services and who provides them. The mission and services, or outputs,
        of the organization, will serve as the basis for PWS development, development of
        standards, definition of performance indicators, and identification of performance
        requirements. To understand the organization, it is helpful to create a tree diagram,
        shown in Figure 3-2 and described in (4).

        A thorough understanding of the organizational mission and a clearly worded mission
        statement are essential to creating a performance-based PWS. Information provided by
        the private sector during market research activities may be useful in developing the
        performance measures used in the PWS and the quality assurance surveillance plan
        (QASP). As applicable, the PWS should address the need for a surge, sustainment, and
        mobilization capability, which could be required for contingency operations that may
        arise as a part of the organization‘s mission. In addition, identifying the risks involved in
        performing a particular function and developing appropriate risk mitigation strategies for
        inclusion in the PWS are important tasks for the activity under competition, the Requiring
        Activity (RA) Commercial Activities (CA) Program Manager, and the preliminary
        planning team.

(4) Tree Diagram

        The tree diagram is one of many tools used to identify functional activities. It breaks a
        job down into its smallest components, with each component representing a final service
        offering. As shown in Figure 3-2, the top box of the tree diagram reflects the overall
        function, and each box beneath it shows the work performed for that function. The boxes
        are numbered to show the relationship of the services to the higher level box. Once the

JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                 23
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


        diagram is developed, it is subjected to two forms of analysis: work analysis and activity
        analysis.

        Work Analysis: In this analysis, each part of the tree diagram is broken down into
        ―input,‖ ―work,‖ and ―output.‖ Input is what is needed to do the job; work includes the
        steps needed to do the job; and output is what (i.e., services, products) the work produces.
        During this analysis, the preliminary planning team, the activity under competition, and
        management staff will decide what outputs to include in the PWS. Many of the outputs
        can be combined, and some will be identified as non-value-added and will not be
        included in the PWS.

        Activity Analysis: Each numbered box in the tree diagram should receive its own activity
        analysis. The analysis will show the outputs of each of the activities. As in the work
        analysis, the analysis will be broken down into input, work, and output. The steps in the
        work section should be sequentially numbered to show how the work is performed.

        Outcome Analysis: Outcomes, not outputs, measure of quality of work. Outcome
        analysis should help determine what the acceptable performance levels (APLs) are and
        how to measure to determine if they have been met.

        Once the preliminary planning team has identified the services that will be included in the
        PWS, additional data can be gathered. The preliminary planning team will need to look
        at how often output services are provided and how long (cycle time) it takes to perform
        the services. This information will either be documented (time sheets, job orders, or
        other records) or undocumented (estimates, industry standards, or observations).

                                   Figure 3-2 Sample Tree Diagram




JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                24
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




(5) Develop Performance Standards

        After the competition is announced, the PWS team will identify measurable performance
        standards (i.e., acceptable performance levels [APL]) for all PWS requirements after the
        public announcement is released. APLs will be used to monitor the service provider (SP)
        (most efficient organization or contractor). Identification of performance standards lets
        the SP know the level of quality or government standard that a PWS output should meet.
        Where standards are not easily identifiable, they will be developed through analysis and
        SME validation. Some standards will be determined by laws and regulations, from which
        there can be no deviation. APL should be designed with overall outcomes, and not just
        outputs, as the basis for measuring the quality of work performed.

        If APLs are not prescribed, the PWS team will work with the activity under competition
        and management staff to decide what indicators would help to measure the process.
        Rates in terms of time, distance, and accuracy are particularly useful for this purpose.
        The PWS team will be careful to choose APLs that are realistic, and each service will
        have a measurable performance standard. The APLs may be summarized in the
        Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) as a technical exhibit to the PWS.

(6) Develop Evaluation Criteria

        Criteria for evaluating technical proposals should be developed during the development
        of the PWS and the QASP. The established criteria will enable the evaluators to
        determine the merit of each proposal with respect to the evaluation factors. The criteria
        will identify what evaluators should look for in proposals and will determine how a
        proposal addresses each factor or subfactor identified in the solicitation. Performance
        criteria facilitate the evaluation of proposals against a uniform objective baseline rather
        than against each other.

        The PWS team is responsible for establishing these technical criteria. The MEO team
        and any potential offerors are expressly prohibited from developing or reviewing the
        evaluation criteria before the request for proposals (RFP) is published.

Note: (5) and (6) are recognized are performed after the the public announcement

3.2.4 Step 4 - Baseline Costing

The PWS Team leader, as the Baseline Costing Official, may delegate the responsibility for
developing the Preliminary Planning Baseline Costs and Adjusted Baseline Costs, but the PWS
Team Leader is responsible for certifying the Preliminary Planning Baseline Cost Report (BCR),
the Adjusted BCR, and for certifying that the preliminary planning has been completed.
Baseline costing is used to determine the Independent Government Estimate (IGE).

For Standard and Streamlined Competitions, the RA shall develop Preliminary Planning and
Adjusted Baseline Costs in accordance with the DOD A-76 Costing Manual as well as any
supplemental DOD guidance (see Appendix F). Baseline costing data should be based on one of

JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                 25
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


the following time frames: (a) a period of not less than 12 months prior to the public
announcement date, or (b) the most current fiscal year. Both the Preliminary Planning and
Adjusted Baseline Costs shall be entered into COMPARE and saved as two separate files.
COMPARE will then generate a BCR for the two types of baseline cost documents. These two
COMPARE files are separate from the COMPARE file created to calculate the agency cost
estimate reflected on the Standard Competition Form (SCF) and Streamlined Competition Form
(SLCF). Once the BCRs have been generated they shall be exported into the Department of
Defense Commercial Activities Management Information System (DCAMIS). Additional
information on the BCR, COMPARE Requirements, and exporting the BCR into DCAMIS can
be found in Appendix F.

Preliminary Planning Baseline Costs shall reflect (a) costs for special and unusual requirements
(e.g., surges, natural disasters, mobilization) occurring during the selected time frame; (b)
known recurring requirements not encountered during the selected time frame but allocated
based on their historical occurrence. The Adjusted Baseline Costs shall reflect changes to such
costs and requirements if they are excluded from the solicitation. Examples include the cost of
facility maintenance and repair; equipment replacement and maintenance; materials and supplies
ordered in excess of a 12-month supply; workman‘s compensation; and equal employment
opportunity.

For in-depth instructions on Baseline Costing for Public-Private Competitions, refer to the
Department of Defense memorandum from Director, Housing and Competitive Sourcing, Office
of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment), dated August 4,
2005, located at Appendix F.

3.2.5. Step 5 - Selection of Competition Type

Once scoping, grouping, and market research are complete, a determination will be made as to
which type of competition will be conducted. OMB Circular A-76 allows for two types of
competition: streamlined and standard.

For Department of Defense (DOD) agencies, streamlined competitions can be used only if, on
the start date:

•   The activity is performed by 9 or fewer FTEs and/or any number of military personnel, or

•   The activity is performed by a private sector or public reimbursable source and the cost
    estimate or tender would achieve an organization of 9 or fewer FTEs

A standard competition will be chosen if:

•   The activity is performed by more than 9 FTEs, or

•   The activity is performed by a private sector or a public reimbursable source and the cost
    estimate or tender would achieve an organization of more than 9 FTEs




JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                26
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Please note that while a standard competition is required for those functions with more than 9
FTEs, this type of competition may be performed for any function regardless of its number of
FTEs.

In deciding what type of competition to use, other factors should be considered in addition to the
number of FTEs to be competed. In accordance with DOD Directives, all A-76 competitions
over 9 FTEs at DLA will have an MEO prepared. The MEO is a staffing plan representing
DLA‘s most efficient and cost-effective organization. This plan is developed through a
combination of reengineering activities conducted during the competition and allows the
government organization to make itself more competitive in preparation for a comparison to a
private organization.

The second factor to consider is the time restrictions imposed by OMB for each type of
competition. Streamlined competitions will be completed in 90 days. However, a one-time 45
calendar-day extension may be granted by the DLA Director as the Component Competitive
Sourcing Official (CCSO) if an MEO is developed or a solicitation issued in a streamlined
competition. In contrast, OMB allows 12 months (with a possible extension of up to 6 months)
for completion of a standard competition. Therefore, depending on the complexity of the
function under competition, it may be best to select a standard competition to take advantage of
the extra time allotted.

Once the RA has decided on the type of competition, it will notify the CSD in writing. The CSD
will then coordinate with the Senior Procurement Executive for approval. Any requests for time
extensions should be submitted at that time, because they must be approved before public
announcement of the competition.

To obtain an extension for a standard competition, the RA will submit an official Time Limit
Waiver request in writing to the CSD. Appendix G provides the official Time Limit Waiver
Template. The waiver request should detail the complexity of the function under competition and
the anticipated time needed to complete the competition. The CSD will submit this request to
the DLA CSO for signature prior to forwarding to the DOD CSO for approval. Time limit
waivers must be approved by the DOD CSO prior to competition announcement. The maximum
time extension permitted through the time limit waiver is 6 months beyond the usual 12-month
standard competition time limit, for a maximum total competition time of 18 months. A copy of
all approved time limit waivers will be submitted to the Deputy Director for Management, OMB.

3.2.6. Step 6 - Development of Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M)

Detailed plans of action and milestones (POA&M) are required for every competition. The RA
will prepare the preliminary planning/PWS POA&M with input from the Contracting Office and
the CSD and is responsible for maintaining its currency throughout the process. Appendix H
provides a DLA POA&M template for use. The POA&M should be tailored to each competition
and created using Microsoft Project software whenever possible. The RA will have a process in
place to ensure that the PWS and the MEO teams regularly update their own separate POA&Ms
to reflect the current status of the competition. The RA will provide monthly updates to the
CSD, who is responsible for providing the POA&Ms to the KO and to the other HQ DLA offices
that require access to the schedule.

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                27
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


3.2.7. STEP 7 - Determining Roles and Responsibilities

During the preliminary planning phase, roles and responsibilities need to be considered. The RA
will need to consider how to utilize available resources most effectively when determing which
personnel will be fulfilling these roles. The firewall between teams also needs to be considered
when forming this framework and when appointing the personnel involved.
3.2.7.1 Commercial Activities Program Manager (CA PM)

A member of the Requiring Activity‘s Commercial Activity Program Office (CAPO) staff will
be designated as the Commercial Activities Program Manager (CA PM), who is responsible for
the management and oversight of all phases of the competition. This role is extremely important
in an A-76 competition and includes, but is not limited to:

       Providing oversight and guidance for the conduct of competitions, and, in cases where
        there will be multiple competitions, assisting in the scheduling of each
       Establishing PWS and MEO teams and identifying members
       Establishing the CGA and transition teams, if a separate team is deemed necessary
       Providing for training and skilled resources to assist the Activity Under Competition
        (AUC) in development of both PWS and Agency Tender.
       Collaborating with the Contracting Officer to develop and maintain acquisition
        documents to include, but not limited to, the PWS, QASP, evaluation criteria,, source
        selection plan, independent government estimate and technical exhibits and technical
        library.
       Assisting PWS teams in additional workload/data collection and analysis, if needed
       Serving as voting member of the source selection advisory council representing the RA
       Assisting the KO in identifying members of the evaluation boards. Provide names and
        bios of the SSAC and SSEB members to the KO to ensure there are no conflicts of
        interest. J-75 will prepare appointment packages for each member once they‘ve been
        cleared.
       Ensuring that the leadership of the Activity Under Competition or designee provides
        periodic updates, not less than monthly, during the development and preparation of the
        PWS and the Management Plan, to civilian employees who will be included in the cost
        comparison competition and consider their views on the development and preparation of
        the PWS and Management Plan (as required by 10 U.S.C. § 2467).
       Planning a series of meetings with DLA management after competition announcement to
        provide an overview of the functions to be studied, efforts to ensure continued mission
        accomplishment during and after the competition, and any proposed impacts.
       In collaboration with the Activity Under Competition, discussing, reviewing, and
        approving the goals, objectives, strategy, methodology, and roles and responsibilities for
        conducting the A-76 competition.
       Maintaining firewalls between PWS and MEO Development Team.

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                28
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




3.2.7.2         PWS and MEO Development Teams

Successful execution of a standard competition will require establishment of PWS and MEO
teams. DLA activities will avoid any dual participation in these two teams. When the PWS and
the MEO teams are established, the RA will let the CSD and Contracting Office know the
identities of the members of both teams. Members may not serve on both teams, nor can they
transfer from one team to the other once PWS development has begun. Additionally, those who
work on the preliminary planning team should not subsequently work on the MEO team.

The RA CA Program Manager and the activity under competition will meet to discuss potential
team leaders and members for the PWS and the MEO teams and their availability for the effort.
Both teams require individuals with management analysis expertise in the functional area under
competition and skills in organizational analysis, industrial engineering, work measurement,
position classification, contract administration, and cost analysis. Good writing skills also are
essential for developing the PWS and the Agency Tender documents. In addition, team members
should have experience in productivity improvement. Although experience in A-76 competitions
is not mandatory, an understanding of A-76 requirements is helpful. The KO, who supports the
PWS team, and the Human Resources Advisor (HRA), who contributes to the MEO team, are
required personnel.

The basic PWS team or MEO team consists of a team leader and functional representatives/
subject matter experts (SME). External resources, such as DORRA and/or consultants, may be
used to augment the teams. DORRA‘s expertise includes business process reengineering,
activity models, functional/economic analyses, operations research, benchmarking, and data
modeling. Consultants provide experience in and knowledge of A-76 competition support, as
well as analysis and other forms of organizational change management. Using DORRA and/or
consultants may also provide the advantages of expert support for time-limited staff and an
independent perspective.

The PWS team leader is an inherently governmental DLA employee who will facilitate the
creation and updating of the competition schedule and dictate how competition-related files,
including gathered data and interview documentation should be retained. Only the PWS team
leader is appointed before competition announcement, with the remaining PWS team members,
the MEO team leader, and MEO team members selected after public announcement.

Functional team members on the PWS team will use their expertise and analytical skills to
develop the PWS and QASP. As a general rule, MEO detailees should not be on the preliminary
planning team. However, if there is limited available expertise, MEO detailees may assist the
preliminary planning team in data gathering only. The MEO team shall develop the Agency
Tender, which consists of the MEO, agency cost estimate (ACE), quality control plan, and
phase-in plan; provide copies of any existing, awarded MEO subcontracts; and prepare and
submit the Agency Tender.

Representatives of labor organizations may participate as members of the PWS or the MEO team
if each member complies with nondisclosure and conflict of interest requirements, FAR
regulations, and OMB Circular A-76 and is not assigned to both the PWS and the MEO teams.

JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                               29
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Union representatives can provide input on the concept of operations, potential new job
descriptions, and other issues that may require renegotiation. They can also provide input on
training/certification gaps, development of right-of-first-refusal procedures, and the employee
interview protocol. In some cases, collective bargaining agreements stipulate that union
representatives serve on the PWS or the MEO team as observers, not as full members. The
applicable collective bargaining agreement for the activity under competition should be checked
to determine whether there are any negotiated parameters that govern union participation on the
teams.

The activity under competition and the RA CA Program Manager also should establish a
resource pool of individuals whose skills are needed for only some portions of the competition or
who may be needed as advisors. This resource pool may include staff from the budget office,
finance/comptrollers, legal counsel, the Equal Employment Opportunity Office, functional
experts, and the PAO. The PWS and MEO teams should be able to draw on support from this
resource pool, as required.

3.2.7.3         Source Selection Advisory Council

The SSAC is a group of professional or managerial government personnel chosen from
functional fields related to the acquisition (e.g., distribution, information technology, property
disposal/reutilization, finance, logistics, law, contracting). The Source Selection Authority
(SSA) appoints the SSAC chair and members. The SSAC advises the SSA on the conduct of the
source selection process.

The SSAC will:

•   Review and approve the evaluation factors and evaluation criteria/standards
•   Have access to the offerors mailing list or the source list recommended by the KO
•   Review and approve the solicitation and authorize its release
•   Review and develop a recommended competitive range determination
•   Provide briefings and consultation as requested by the SSA
•   Provide a recommendation on the source(s) to be selected if requested by the SSA.

The individual SSAC members (appointed by the SSA) should include personel from the
following:

•   General Counsel (DG) (advisory)
•   Comptroller (J-8) (voting)
•   Chief, Acquisition Operations Division (J-72) (voting)
•   Applicable Corporate Business Management Office (voting)
•   DLA HQ CSD (advisory)
•   Human Resources (J-1) (voting)
•   KO (ex officio member) (advisory)
•   RA (voting)




JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                30
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


3.2.7.4          Source Selection Evaluation Board

The SSEB is a group of government personnel representing various technical and functional
disciplines and possessing the professional skills and knowledge required to evaluate proposals
and report the group‘s findings to the KO, Legal Counsel, the SSAC, and the SSA, as
appropriate. The SSA appoints the SSEB chair and members after the competition
announcement. The KO, RA, and CSD will work together to identify personnel who could serve
in these roles. Directly affected personnel may not serve on the SSEB. In addition, SSEB
members should not have family members (such as spouses or children) who are directly
affected personnel.

In addition to meeting the requirements of FAR 15.303, SSEB responsibilities include:

         Conducting an in-depth, fair, and impartial review and evaluation of each offeror‘s
          technical and past performance proposal against the solicitation requirements and the
          approved Source Selection Plan (SSP)
         Preparing and submitting the SSEB report to the SSA/SSAC, as determined by the SSA,
          along with a summary briefing on the findings. For each offeror, the SSEB report should
          address:
          –   What is offered
          –   Whether the proposal meets or fails to meet the standard
          –   Proposal strengths, inadequacies, and uncertainties
          –   The likelihood that the offeror will be able to make the requisite corrections through
              revisions

SSEB members are also required to identify any aspects of a proposal that require clarification or
revision; rate each proposal; prepare and submit source selection reports, as required by FAR
15.608 (b); and provide briefings and consultation concerning evaluations, as required by the
SSA or the SSAC.

SSEB members should receive just-in-time training before they begin any evaluation. This
formal training, which ranges from 1 to 1.5 days, ensures that the targeted SSEB teams
understand their responsibilities for conducting fair, in-depth, and impartial reviews and
evaluation of proposals against solicitation requirements and other approved factors. The
training is sponsored by the CSD and is outlined in Appendix I.

3.2.7.5          Price Evaluation Board

The Price Evaluation Board (PEB) analyzes the proposed price(s)/cost(s) of the proposals. As
with the SSEB, directly affected personnel may not serve on the PEB, and PEB members should
not have family members who are directly affected personnel. PEB responsibilities include:

         Conducting an in-depth, fair, consistent, and impartial review and evaluation of each
          cost/price proposal against the solicitation requirements and the approved SSP
         Addressing the findings of the Defense Contract Audit Agency/team auditing the ACE

JULY 20, 2011                                                        CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                   31
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


       Identifying any aspects of a proposal that require clarification, are deficient, or appear to
        be inconsistent with the requirements of the solicitation
       Assessing the risk associated with each offeror‘s cost/price proposal
       Preparing and submitting the PEB report to the SSAC and the SSA, as determined by the
        SSA, along with a summary briefing on the findings

       The KO will serve as PEB chair, with members appointed by the SSA.

3.2.8. Step 8 Avoiding Conflicts of Interest

There must be a clear separation of responsibilities, or ―firewall,‖ between the PWS and the
MEO teams (i.e., the same individuals must not serve on both teams). There must also be a
separation between any consultant personnel supporting development of the PWS and those
supporting the MEO. In addition, when consultants are used to prepare a PWS and an MEO,
sufficient measures must be taken to avoid potential conflicts of interest or the appearance of
such conflicts, in accordance with FAR Part 9, DOD guidance, and the Jones/Hill Government
Accountability Office decision of 2002. If a breach of the conflict of interest firewall occurs, the
KO will determine what steps are necessary to ensure a fair and competitive process. Table 3-12
shows situations in which a conflict of interest exists.

                                   Table 3-12 Conflict of Interest Matrix

                                                  PWS/QASP                MEO                 Source
                                                  Preparation          Development           Selection
                  PWS Team and PWS
                  Approving Officials
                                                        OK                 Conflict            Maybe

                  MEO Development
                  Team and MEO                       Conflict                OK                Conflict
                  Approving Officials
                  Contracting Officer and
                                                        OK                 Conflict               OK
                  Source Selection Team
                  Preliminary Planning
                                                        OK                 Conflict            Maybe*
                  Team

It is important for the activity under competition and the RA‘s CA Program Manager to be aware
of and sensitive to ethical considerations related to the A-76 and procurement processes.
Participation by an employee or a contractor on the PWS team or the MEO team could trigger
the application of statutory and regulatory requirements governing conflict of interest, ―revolving
door‖ bars, or restrictions on post-employment and seeking or negotiating for employment,
among other ethical considerations. For example, an employee of the activity under competition




   The person who will serve as an SSA may not serve on or assist the PWS team if he or she is a member of, or
    organizationally affiliated with, the activity under competition.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                             32
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


who seeks employment with a company that is an actual or potential offeror for the solicitation
may have a conflict of interest.†

The PWS Team Leader and Agency Tender Official should coordinate with the Office of
General Counsel (DG) to arrange training on conflict of interest issues for all personnel involved
in their respective teams. Training will be completed before the signing of nondisclosure and
conflict of interest statements to prevent unauthorized disclosure of source selection or proposal
information (including the government‘s Agency Tender). Examples of nondisclosure forms are
provided in Appendix J. Program Managers should consult with their KO and legal advisors to
ensure that the nondisclosure forms address the appropriate issues regarding each person‘s
unique situation.

3.2.9. Step 9 - Appointment of Competition Officials

The following sections describe the required roles and responsibilities of the competition
officials, who will be appointed in writing before the competition is announced.

3.2.9.1            DLA Component Competitive Sourcing Official

The Director of DLA, as the CCSO, will:

         Conduct all communications with the DOD Competitive Sourcing Official (CSO) and
          submit all needed requests for approval
         Centralize oversight, to the greatest extent possible, and allocate sufficient resources for
          conducting competitions
         Enforce use of the DOD Commercial Activities Management Information System
         Ensure that public announcements of competitions are conducted in a timely manner and
          recommend appropriate action if no satisfactory private sector or public reimbursable
          source offer is received
         Appoint competition officials for each standard competition and, as appropriate, appoint
          competition officials for streamlined competitions
         Appoint all competition officials in writing and, through use of annual performance
          evaluations, hold these competition officials accountable for the timely and proper
          performance of streamlined or standard competitions
         Staff the individual appointments and ensure that officials are fully briefed and informed
          of their specific roles and responsibilities




†   Generally, persons‘ furnishing of data or technical support to be used by others in developing the performance standards,
    PWS, or MEO will not adversely affect their right of first refusal for employment with a contractor if the competition results
    in a contract award.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                         CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                              33
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


3.2.9.2         Agency Tender Official

The Agency Tender Official (ATO) is an inherently governmental agency official, independent
of the KO, the Source Selection Authority (SSA), the Source Selection Evaluation Board
(SSEB), and the PWS team. The ATO has oversight responsiblity for MEO development and
any associated tasks. The ATO is responsible for executing the Letter of Obligation (LoO)
including implementation and performance of the MEO in accordance with the PWS. The ATO
should appoint the MEO Responsible Official for day to day oversight. Because the ATO
appoints the MEO team lead and members and ultimately makes all management decisions
concerning the Agency Tender, he or she shall have decision-making authority.

Specific roles for the ATO include:

•   Developing, certifying, and representing the Agency Tender
•   Assigning members to the MEO team after the public announcement
•   Providing any training and resources needed to prepare the Agency Tender

The ATO is also considered a directly interested party. The RA is responsible for ensuring that
the ATO has access to those available resources (e.g., skilled manpower, funding) necessary for
developing a competitive Agency Tender.

As a rule, the commander/director of an activity undergoing competition will not be assigned as
the ATO. Also, the ATO shall not be rated by the SSA. In addition, the ATO is responsible for
submitting a viable and timely agency tender that meets the requirements set forth in the PWS.
This responsibility is indicated in the ATO appointment letter. The contracting officer will be
notified of any delay in submission of the agency tender and will, in turn, apprise the SSA.

3.2.9.3         Senior Procurement Executive (SPE)

The SPE is DLA‘s senior acquisition executive whose role and responsibility are to maintain the
acquisition integrity of an A-76 competition. The SPE‘s responsibility in preliminary planning is
to review Preliminary Planning Report and provide a decision to the RA to complete the final
preliminary planning steps and announce the competition. If the SPE finds the Decision Briefing
does not provide sufficient cause for a competition to be announced, another line of action will
be recommended for the study (i.e., High Performance Organization, change in study type or
revisit analysis). The SPE also reviews SSAC‘s recommendation for actions regarding
performance of the Service Provider after the first year of full operations.

The SPE chairs the A-76 Program Executive Steering Group and has representation on the A-76
Program Working Integrated Product Team to providing guidance and direction on the planning,
programming, and execution of the DLA competitive sourcing program. The SPE ensures DLA
is in full compliance with OMB and OSD competitive sourcing regulations and directives.

3.2.9.4         Contracting Officer

The KO is an inherently governmental agency official who is (1) independent of the ATO, the
Human Resource Advisor (HRA), and the MEO team and (2) a member of the PWS team. The

JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                               34
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


KO is responsible for numerous aspects of the competitive sourcing process. These
responsibilities include, but are not limited to:

•   Ensuring that the solicitation is procurable and enforceable
•   Issuing the resulting contract or letter of obligation
•   Developing the acquisition and source selection plans (SSP)
•   Conducting the solicitation activities
•   Releasing public announcements concerning the solicitation, including the award decision or
    any cancellations that may occur (specific details are provided in FAR 2.101)

3.2.9.5          PWS Team Leader

The PWS team leader leads the effort to develop the PWS and the quality assurance surveillance
plan (QASP). This position will be filled by an inherently governmental agency official who is
independent of the ATO, the HRA, and the MEO team. The PWS team leader will:

•   Work closely with the KO to develop the solicitation
•   Determine which property will be considered government-furnished property
•   Help implement the performance decision
•   Certify Baseline Cost Estimate

3.2.9.6          Human Resource Advisor

As the human resources advisor, the HRA is an active participant on the MEO team. Therefore,
the HRA is independent of the PWS team, the SSA, the KO, and the SSEB. The HRA will:

         Identify adversely affected employees and inform them of any restrictions on post-
          employment
         Prioritize vacancy considerations and develop reemployment priority lists
         Be highly involved with the MEO team to support development of the Agency Tender,
          including advising the team on classification restrictions and description
          recommendations
         Advise on scheduling competition milestones, identifying phase-in events, developing the
          phase-in plan, and developing the employee transition plan
         Provide labor market research to ensure that sufficient staff are available for the MEO
          and to support implementation of the phase-in plan

         Provide advice on existing union agreements and be the point of contact for coordination
          and communication with the Union

3.2.9.7          Source Selection Authority

The SSA is an inherently governmental agency official who is responsible for the integrity of the
source selection process and is independent of the HRA, the ATO, and the MEO team.

JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                  35
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


The SSA:

         Is designeated by the CCSO
         Oversees, as needed, the Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) and the SSEB for
          standard competitions
         Certifies the performance decision by signing the standard competition form

3.2.9.8             Baseline Costing Official

For Standard and Streamlined Competitions, the CCSO shall appoint, in writing, an official
responsible for developing and certifying the Preliminary Planning Baseline Costs and Adjusted
Baseline Costs. For a Standard Competition, the PWS Team Leader will be appointed as the
Baseline Costing Official and will not play a role on the AT team. The same rule applies for
individuals participating as members or advisors to the MEO Development Team. For a
Streamlined Competition, the Baseline Costing Official shall not be the individual that prepares
Streamlined Competition.

3.2.10. Step 10 - Developing the Competition Plan

The development of a Competition Plan as one of the preliminary planning documents is required
for each competition unless specified otherwise during preliminary planning. This Competition
Plan is the precursor to the Acquisition Plan, and will be submitted by both the A-76 Contracting
Officer and PWS Team Leader and approved by the SSA. It should be developed in the
following format:

    1.     Statement of need. Addresses the functions, number of FTEs, baseline cost, and
           anticipated savings of the competition.

    2.     Applicable conditions. Identifies all significant conditions affecting the competition,
           including:

           a. Requirements for compatibility with existing or future systems or programs;

           b. Any known cost, schedule, and capability or performance constraints;

           c. Identification of existing contracts and inter-service support agreements included
              within the scope and an assessment of the impact on the competition of their
              inclusion/exclusion; and,

           d. Competition organization to include the following:

                    Source Selection Authority (SSA) – Identify by name

                    Chairperson, Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) – Provide the
                     organization code and grade/rank

JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                  36
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




                   SSAC members (both voting and advisory) – Provide the organization code and
                    proposed grade/rank

                   Chairperson, Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)

                   SSEB members – Provide the organization code and grade/rank

                   Agency Tender Official (ATO) – Identify by name

                   Human Resource Advisor (HRA)

                   Performance Work Statement Team – Identify by grade/rank

                   Performance Work Statement Team Lead – Identify by Name

    3.    Anticipated source selection method. Addresses the use of Lowest Price Technically
          Acceptable, Phased Evaluation, or Tradeoff source selection processes and the rationale
          for how this decision was made. The Tradeoff process is restricted to information
          technology only in DOD due to 10 USC 2462.

    4.    Risks. Discusses technical, cost, and schedule risks and describes what efforts are
          planned or underway to reduce risk and the consequences of failure to conclude the
          competition on time and on budget.

    5.    Market research. Indicates the prospective sources of supplies or services that can meet
          the need. Includes consideration of small business, veteran-owned small business,
          service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small
          disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns, and the impact of
          any bundling that may affect their participation in the competition. Discusses the
          extent and results of the market research and their impact on the scoping and grouping.

    6.    Funding. Identifies how the various functions are currently funded; e.g., working
          capital fund, non-appropriated fund, customer reimbursement. Addresses the impact of
          the various funding sources on the competition.

    7.    Workload data and systems. Assesses the availability of workload data, work units,
          quantifiable outputs of activities or processes, agency or industry performance
          standards, and other similar data, and the impact on the competition.

    8.    Government-furnished property. Identifies any property, including material,
          equipment, and facilities, that will be furnished to the service provider. Discusses how
          any shared property will be addressed. Includes any planned MILCON or equipment
          replacement.



JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                37
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


    9.    Other considerations. Identifies, as applicable, any other situations or considerations
          that may affect the competition.

    10. Competition milestones. Addresses the following steps and any others that are
        appropriate:

               Competition plan approval.

               Competition announcement.

               Issuance of draft solicitation (as applicable).

               Issuance of final solicitation.

               Solicitation closing.

               Performance decision.

               Phase-in start.

               Phase-in completion.

3.2.11. Step 11 - Developing the Training Plan

Because of A-76 competitions‘ significant impacts on the workforce, on February 1, 2001 the
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations) issued a memorandum stating that DOD will
continually strive to improve and strengthen training and education on the A-76 process.
Training for personnel involved in competitive sourcing activities is essential to maintaining
fairness and minimizing errors in the A-76 process. All personnel must have a basic knowledge
of the A-76 process before team or official appointment. Training should be scheduled to
provide the maximum benefit to trainees and should not conflict with the overall competition
schedule. To ensure the most beneficial timing of such training, it is important to develop a
training strategy during preliminary planning. A sample Training Plan is available in Appendix
K. The RA will coordinate and fund CA training for personnel when needed. Depending on the
type of training or its content, courses may be conducted before the start of the competition or
throughout the competition. Training for board members should be conducted after appointment
but before the beginning of board activities. Appendix I provides a list of minimum training and
knowledge requirements.

3.2.12 Developing the Communication Plan – Step 12

The purpose of a Communications Plan is to establish and document organization activities that
communicate with Defense Logistics Agency employees, customers, and stakeholders in a timely
manner on its implementation of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76 in
accordance with the President‘s Management Agenda (PMA). A sample Communications Plan is
available in Appendix S.



JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                    38
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


The communication plan sets and maintains the tone for an A-76 competition. The various
phases of a competition assign Leads that will have the authority and responsibility to dispatch
effective Competitive Sourcing related communications to the DLA community.

To help ensure communications provide timely and accurate information instead of thru the
―grape vine‖, the Requiring Activity should implement the following structure:
       The Preliminary Planning Lead, PWS Team Lead, and Agency Tender Official will
        coordinate all competitive sourcing related communications activities respective of their
        phases.
       Working with Human Resources Advisors, union officials, and J-75 Competitive
        Sourcing Division, the Requiring Activity and phase leadership will be able to provide a
        consistent and uniformed approach to disseminate relatable information.
       A variety of media will be employed to ensure effective and efficient communications to
        and from DLA and Requiring Activity employees, customers, and stakeholders.
       Included among the various media are meetings, electronic (e.g.., DLA Today and
        Tomorrow webpage), local media coverage, and written communications (e.g.,
        Congressional Notifications) to inform affected and interested parties on the status of
        competitive sourcing related activities.
       All communications will address the needs of hearing, sight, and other impaired DLA
        personnel.
       Management Meetings: Based on decision by the competition officials the Requiring
        Activity Leads will meet with managers whose employees are subject to competitive
        sourcing review. If and when the established schedule changes, the communication plan
        will be amended. The communication plan is a living document that relays the latest
        information with the most open of dialogue and transparency without divulging
        procurement information.
       In addition, the Requiring Activity will meet periodically with the Working Integrated
        Product Team (WIPT) and Executive Steering Group (ESG) to report on the status of
        competitive sourcing activities and to obtain feedback and guidance from participants.
       All Hands Meetings: As deemed appropriate by the respective Requiring Activity and
        the competitive sourcing Leads will convene all affected staff to provide a status report
        on and address questions staff may have related to competitive sourcing activities. Other
        members of the competitive sourcing teams that are involved with All Hands meetings
        are the Human Resources Advisor, Contracting Official, Legal and respective
        Commanders, SES and or designee.
       Ad hoc Meetings: The Requiring Activity competitive sourcing Leads will provide a
        Point of Contact (POC) to assist with answering ‗just-in-time,‘ face-to-face informational
        sessions with targeted audiences. These sessions will provide a forum where employees
        and others may dialogue about specific issues of interest to them.


JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                39
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


       Town Hall Meetings: The Requiring Activity will plan, announce, and conduct periodic
        Town Hall meetings to discuss the progress of the competitive sourcing study with
        affected employees, their supervisors, and other interested parties. In order to ensure a
        consistent message, all meeting materials will be cleared by the WIPT and J-75
        Competitive Sourcing Division.
Electronic communication is the fastest way to disseminate information to a large audience of
interested personnel and stakeholders. The use of the DLA A-76 http://www.dla.mil/J-3/a-76/A-
76Main.html webpage and the Requiring Activity‘s home page provides easy access for
interested parties. Websites are updated to include information on the progress of competitive
sourcing efforts as well as provide further information through links, lessons learned pages and
POC information.
                               Key Communications Activities

Preliminary Planning Study Startup Meeting
Requiring Activity Management Briefings
Competitive Sourcing Team Meetings
Website Updates to identify POC
WIPT Briefings
Customer Communications Plan (Stakeholders and DLA leadership)
News Release Articles and Press kits
Town Hall Meetings

The important obstacle for the communication plan to overcome is the inherent confusion and fear
associated with an A-76 competition and associated activities. Fear within a workforce comes
from a lack of knowledge about the processes and rationale for A-76. The communication plan is
a great vehicle providing not only current activities, but resources in which concerned individuals
can access information.

Maintaining timely announcements and holding regularly scheduled meetings will benefit all
involved in a competition. Maintaining transparent communications provides understanding by
the workforce and their stakeholders in order to obtain buy-in and cooperation. Communication
plans become an important tool to utilize cooperation during the interview sessions and data
gathering sessions of the Preliminary Planning, PWS and Agency Tender phases.



3.2.13 Step 13 - Notification for Congress, Customers and Other Parties

National and local organizations will be notified when announcing an A-76 competition. HQ
DLA conducts and/or coordinates all congressional, DOD, service component, press, and all
relevant union notifications, including American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)
and other recognized unions. Press packages and sample questions and answers can be
developed by the Activity Under Competition to assist with local notifications.

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                40
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Congressional notifications will be concurrent to or precede union notifications and are sent to
the Congressional offices in Washington, D.C., the affected district offices, and the Chairmen of
the Defense Committees. Examples of a Competition Announcement Media Release and a
Results Announcement Awarding to the Contractor Decision Media Release, and Results
Announcement Awarding to the MEO Decision Media Release is available in Appendix L.
Sample Congressional Notifications announcing an A-76 Study and an A-76 Tentative Decision,
Congressional Notification of Reduction in Force (RIF), and a sample Union Notification of
Award Decision are all available in Appendix M.
Note: Notification of Congress will occur before public announcement of a public-private
competition, but notification of unions, employees, and the public as soon as possible after this
will significantly reduce the chances of any premature, incorrect, or otherwise inappropriate
information being released from unofficial sources. Therefore, it is most prudent to announce
the competition publicly the day after sending the congressional notifications.
It is a good idea for the Activity Under Competition to meet with the affected workforce shortly
after the formal congressional notification. However, before any all-hands or other meetings
with affected employees occur, the Activity Under Competition should meet with all appropriate
local union representatives to discuss potential effects of the A-76 competition on employees.
Consideration also should be given to having similar meetings with other stakeholders.
Any local public notification of an A-76 competition will be coordinated with the local PAO (to
include both the Requiring Activity PAO and the Activity Under Competition PAO) and DLA
HQ PAO staff.


3.2.14 STEP 14 Notification of Incumbent Service Providers

Affected employees of the function under competition, private sector service providers and
public reimbursable sources will be notified of the scope of the competition. The notification
will occur prior to the public announcement. This notification ensures that positions that
perform duties of the functions are aware of potential data gathering activities. The Contracting
Office will use information developed in the Preliminary Planning Assessment Form to contact
the necessary incumbent service providers.
Included in the notification is a tentative date of the public announcement, descriptition of
further notification methods (i.e., letters to employees, emails, websites, phone calls) and the
scope of activities that encompass functions up for competition.


4   PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF COMPETITION

When DLA has decided to announce a streamlined or a standard competition, the KO will post a
public announcement on FedBizOpps.gov (a sample template for a FedBizOpps.gov
announcement of a DLA A-76 competition can be found at Appendix N). On that same day, the
CSD will provide a copy of the notice to the OSD Competitive Sourcing Office as a method of
keeping that office informed. Information in the posting will include the agency/RA/agency
component, the type of competition, the activity being competed, current SP(s), location(s) of the
JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                 41
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


activity, the name of the CCSO and the ATO, the number of government personnel performing
the activity, any approved OMB deviations (e.g., time limit extensions), and the projected
competition end date. The start date of the competition is the day a public announcement is
posted on FedBizOpps.gov. The RA and the CSD should coordinate a detailed schedule of
events for each public announcement. Appendices O and Q provide templates of announcement
and decision schedules.

Additional public notices will be coordinated between the RA, the CSD, Legislative Affairs
(DL), and Public Affairs (DP) to notify the following: OSD, Congress, local legislative officials,
the DLA American Federation of Government Employees Council, local union(s), the
workforce, and national/local press offices prior to public announcement. Samples of these
documents are available in Appendix D and in Appendix M.

It is recommended that the activity under competition meet with the affected workforce shortly
after formal congressional notification. However, before any all-hands meeting or other
meetings with affected employees, the activity under competition should meet with all
appropriate local union representatives to discuss the A-76 competition‘s potential effects on
employees. Similar meetings with other stakeholders should also be considered. Affected
unions may invoke their right to negotiate the impact and implementation of the A-76
competition; any such negotiations should be handled through the HRO
4.1     LABOR RELATIONS ISSUES FOR A-76 STUDIES

An A-76 competition affects the working conditions of employees, even if the competition
ultimately results in the work remaining in-house. If any of the employees in the function being
studied are represented by a union, management has some labor relations obligations it must
observe during the course of the A-76 process. By satisfying these labor relations obligations,
management can avoid some pitfalls that could otherwise adversely affect the progress of the
competition or the implementation of the competition‘s results. One of these important
obligations is to follow any collective bargaining agreement provisions that require certain
procedures to be followed in the course of an A-76 competition. Becoming familiar with those
procedures in the applicable collective bargaining agreement should be one of the first steps
before the competition is initiated, to avoid inadvertently violating any such requirements.
Bearing that in mind, the following paragraphs describe the labor relations implications of A-76
studies.

To begin with, whenever an A-76 competition is going to be initiated, DLA will first notify any
unions that represent employees in the function to be studied. Typically, only one union is
affected by any individual A-76 competition, but sometimes there could be more than one union
affected. The largest union in DLA is the American Federation of Government Employees
(AFGE), but there are also some other unions that represent employees in various parts of DLA.

The DLA Human Resources Center (DHRC) can identify whether any unions are affected by an
A-76 competition, so they should be contacted early to get that information. Human Resources
will also provide the actual notice to the affected union(s). This notice to unions is required by
law, specifically the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (5 USC Chapter 71),
which requires Federal agencies to notify affected unions of any significant changes in

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                42
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


conditions of employment before the changes occur. Although OMB Circular A-76 requires a
local public announcement of all streamlined and standard competitions, that public
announcement does not satisfy the need to notify the affected union(s). The official notice to the
affected union(s) is generally made right before the public announcement occurs, although
management will often give the union an advance indication of its intent to compete a particular
function.

OMB Circular A-76 requires agencies to interface with the representatives of directly affected
employees from the date of the public announcement until full implementation of the
performance decision. Thus, informing the union about the start of an A-76 competition is the
necessary first step in a continuing process of communicating with the union about the
competition. In addition, communicating and sharing information with the union, to the extent
permitted by Circular A-76 and other applicable regulations and laws, can help alleviate fears
about the competition. It can also help make the remaining interactions with the union about the
competition and its aftermath more cordial. Any event that threatens employees‘ job security
will cause anxiety among the employees and the union, and communication is a tool to help
lessen that anxiety.

There is another reason that unions need to be notified of any upcoming A-76 studies. Once the
competition is completed and a cost comparison decided, there will be some impact on the
employees that the union represents. If the work is to be contracted out, employees will lose
their jobs or have to be reassigned. If the work is retained in-house, the Most Efficient
Organization (MEO) will probably be smaller than the existing workforce, so there will still be
some negative impact on the employees that the union represents.

Unions cannot try to negotiate against conducting an A-76 competition. By law, these decisions
are reserved strictly to management. However, unions may negotiate procedures or ―appropriate
arrangements‖ that management will follow in carrying out its decisions. Unions typically use
those negotiations to try to soften the impact on the employees they represent. For example, a
union may propose that management take certain actions to help displaced employees find new
jobs, such as allowing them some duty time to conduct a job search, or locating employers in the
area who are hiring so displaced employees can contact them about employment opportunities

These negotiations cannot realistically occur until after the A-76 competition is completed and
the decision of whether or not to contract out has been made. However, these negotiations will
have to be completed before the results of the performance decision (such as a Reduction in
Force) impact the employees.

Aside from notifying the union(s) about an A-76 competition, there are some other situations in
which labor relations requirements impact the competition process. One of the most important is
the need to be aware of any negotiated provisions about A-76 studies in the applicable collective
bargaining agreement, sometimes called the ―union contract‖. This agreement is a legally
binding contract between an agency and a union, so management must be careful to honor its
provisions. For example, DLA has a Master Labor Agreement with AFGE, the largest union in
DLA. Most collective bargaining agreements have an article about contracting out, and the
personnel conducting an A-76 competition should make sure they know what the agreement says

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                               43
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


about contracting out, so they can comply with it. Any questions about this should be directed to
Human Resources.

In addition, sometimes a union may request copies of various documents related to the A-76
competition. The legal requirements on which documents will be released to a union upon
request, and which documents do not have to be released (or cannot be released), can be
intricate. Contact Human Resources and/or the General Counsel office if you receive any
requests for information from a union.

Another time when unions may become involved in an A-76 competition is if management
conducts any meetings with the affected employees, such as ―All Hands‖ or ―Town Hall‖
meetings to tell the employees what is happening regarding the A-76 competition. By law, a
union has the right to be invited to attend certain meetings between management and employees,
if the topic of the meeting involves ―general working conditions‖. A meeting to discuss the
initiation, status or results of an A-76 competition will almost certainly meet the definition of
―general working conditions‖, so DLA managers should contact Human Resources to arrange for
inviting the union before having any meetings of this kind with the affected employees.

If any Performance Work Statement (PWS) teams or Most Efficient Organization (MEO) teams
are formed to conduct portions of the competition, the applicable collective bargaining
agreement may give any affected unions the opportunity to name an observer to sit with the
team(s) and observe the process. If the union will have any observers for such teams, it is
important to remember that Circular A-76 does not allow an individual to serve on both the PWS
team and the MEO team, to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. While the Circular
does not specifically mention observers, it does mention advisors and consultants as being
covered by that requirement and it would likewise follow that the same individual should not
observe both teams on the union‘s behalf. Any union observers should be held to the same
confidentiality requirements as any other team participants, so that PWS and MEO information is
not shared at any stage in which Circular A-76 does not allow it to be shared.

Once the competition is completed and the cost comparison decided, the notice of the A-76
decision should be made to the union(s) immediately before the announcement is made to the
affected employees. The notice of the A-76 decision to the affected unions is done by Human
Resources. Contact them to coordinate the arrangements for this notice well ahead of time. That
notice will probably trigger a request by the affected union(s) to negotiate procedures and
appropriate arrangements for the employees affected by the upcoming changes. As discussed
above, those negotiations cannot change the outcome of the A-76 process, but they may result in
provisions that management must follow as it implements the results of the A-76 process.

An otherwise proper A-76 decision can be stalled or require re-work if the union‘s rights under
the law are not observed. To avoid that problem, contact Human Resources very early in the
process to plan out the required labor relations steps.

4.2     RELEASE OF OTHER PUBLIC NOTICES

In accordance with DOD Instruction 4100.33, periodic announcements on plans for and progress
of ongoing competitive sourcing competitions should be issued to affected employees and other

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                               44
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


interested parties, including tenants, local activities, employee groups, and unions. In addition,
DOD is usually notified before a public or congressional announcement. Notifications should
include the following at a minimum:

Once the CSD officially notifies the RA of the type of competition chosen, DLA HQ should
announce the start of the competition to Congress (if required). Immediately thereafter, the
activity under competition should announce to the affected employees the intent to conduct a
competitive sourcing competition.
At or after completion of the SCF (for a standard competition) or the SLCF (for a streamlined
competition), the activity under competition or its designee should announce the performance
decision and the service provider start date to employees. Once there is a performance decision
in favor of a contractor (and therefore a conditional award), the DL will notify Congress before
the activity under competition commander or his or her designee notifies the workforce.

At the conclusion of any contests, the activity under competition or its designee should announce
the outcome of the contest process to the employees. In the case of a contract performance
decision (and therefore a contract award), the DL will notify Congress before the activity under
competition or designee notifies employees. Decisions on each contest should be provided to all
offerors and the government‘s MEO team. While employees are being notified, the KO will
notify all offerors who submitted proposals of the award decision. Once these notifications are
complete, the local Public Affairs Office (PAO) should notify the local media. The CSD, in
coordination with the RA and the KO, will have completed a performance decision schedule (see
Appendix O) in advance of the decision so that all parties with responsibilities in the
announcement process are aware of their responsibilities. Like the announcement of the
competition, an announcement of the performance decision will be posted on FedBizOpps.gov,
signifying the official end of the competition.

A certified SCF or SLCF signifies the official performance decision. The DOD CSO will
approve in advance all cancellations of any previously announced competition. Any cancellation
of a previously posted public announcement of a cost competition also will be posted on
FedBizOpps.gov, and all directly affected employees notified. No cancellation announcement is
necessary before the public announcement of a streamlined or a standard competition. The KO,
in accordance with the FAR, may cancel solicitations once approval has been granted by the
DOD CSO. If a solicitation is canceled, the KO will issue a public announcement via
FedBizOpps.gov. Appendix P provides further information concerning the release of
information.


(More Information to be Inserted upon Completion)




JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 3—PRELIMINARY PLANNING
                                                45
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


5     STREAMLINED COMPETITION

According to DOD policy, streamlined competitions may be used for competitions requiring less
than 10 civilian FTEs. A streamlined competition may include the development of a Most
Efficient Organization (MEO), which is the government‘s proposal for realizing efficiencies.
The time frame for streamlined competitions is 90 calendar days. When an MEO is developed or
a solicitation is issued, a one-time extension of 45 days may be granted by the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA) Director as the Component Competitive Sourcing Official (CCSO). DOD
requires the development of an MEO for all competitions involving 10 or more FTEs, regardless
of whether or not they are streamlined or standard.

Figure 5.1 outlines the requirements and the team makeup for streamlined competitions. A
check mark indicates a required item in the table.

                      Figure 5.1 Streamlined Competition Requirements

       As-Is                                           Private
                             MEO          MEO Cost                    Cost        # (and Type) of
       Cost     PWS/SOO                                Sector
                          Development    Development               Comparison    Teams Required
      Method                                            Cost


                                                                  
       IGE                                                                               3


       
                                                                                 (PWS/IGE, MEO,
                                                                                Private Sector Cost)



5.1     STREAMLINED COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1 Process for a Streamlined Competition

Three teams are required for a streamlined competition with an MEO. One team develops the
IGE for comparison with the MEO; a second team, the MEO team, creates the MEO itself; while
the third team, the market research/private sector cost team, is responsible for building the
private sector cost estimate and conducting the cost comparison.

The creation of an MEO makes the activity under competition more competitive because it
allows the in-house workforce to achieve a higher level of efficiency before its comparison with
private sector offers. MEO development requires time and resources. Therefore, the CCSO may
grant a one-time 45-calendar-day extension (added to the usual 90-day streamlined competition
time frame) before public announcement. If the competition is not completed within the allotted
time frame, it must be converted to a standard competition or a request for additional time must
be made to OMB. For functions with fewer than 10 FTEs, the extra resource requirements and
the inability to reduce FTEs and still meet mission requirements should be factored into the
decision on whether to create an MEO.

To create an MEO:

1. Document the current as-is organization, including the level of effort currently needed to
   perform workload and process descriptions
2. Identify areas for improvement and efficiencies where possible

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                               46
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


3. Provide recommendations to personnel and established processes to achieve maximum
   efficiency
4. Create the ACE on the basis of the MEO organization

In a streamlined competition, as in the other types of competitions, the conflict of interest
guidance outlined in Section 3.2.8 should be followed. Membership on the MEO team is subject
to the same requirements as a standard competition, including support from the Human
Resources Authority.

5.1.2 Streamlined Cost Process and Information

After public announcement of the competition the Contracting Officer (KO) will calculate,
compare, and certify costs based on the scope and requirements of the activity under competition
to determine and document a cost-effective performance decision. These steps are accomplished
through completion of the Streamlined Competition Form (SLCF) (shown in Figure 5-2) as
outlined in the following subsections.

5.1.3 Cost of Agency Performance

The DOD A-76 Costing Manual‘s (accessible at the A-76 Competitive Sourcing Internet Library
& Directory links under OSD) policy specifically states that DOD Components shall use the
DOD A-76 Costing Manual, and COMPARE shall be used to prepare the Agency Cost Estimate
for all cost comparisons. In accordance with the Manual and with Attachment C of OMB
Circular A-76, the Agency Tender Official (ATO) will calculate and certify the cost of
performing the activity with government personnel for a minimum of three annual performance
periods by completing SLCF Line 1 (Personnel Costs), Line 2 (Material and Supply Costs), Line
3 (Other Specifically Attributable Costs [items that do not fit into Lines 1, 2, or 4; limited to
awarded contracts supporting agency performance of the activity]), Line 4 (Overhead Costs), and
Line 6 (Total Cost of Agency Performance). Specific guidelines for using the required cost
comparison software, COMPARE, are provided on the SHARE A-76 Web site, in the
COMPARE User‘s Guide, and in Attachment C of OMB Circular A-76. These sources should
be checked frequently, since updates to the software occur regularly.


5.1.3.1 Cost of Private Sector/Public Reimbursable Performance

The KO will determine an estimated contract price for performing the activity with a private
sector source for streamlined competitions by using documented market research, or, for
standard competitions, the KO will solicit cost proposals in accordance with the Federal
Acquisition Regulations (FAR). The KO will also determine an estimated cost for performing
the activity with a public reimbursable source by calculating (or requesting that a public
reimbursable source calculate) SLCF Lines 1a, 2a, 3a (limited to awarded contracts), 4a, and 6a.

The Market Research Method

If the market research method is used for the streamlined cost comparison, it is important to
develop a comparable private sector cost by researching what the market is paying for a

JULY 20, 2011                                                 CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                                47
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


particular service. Two valuable sources for initial research are the Department of Labor Web
site at www.wdol.gov and www.salary.com, which provide a perspective on how functions are
categorized and insight on salary ranges for different localities.

The objective of market research is to obtain information on the service industry that is the focus
of the streamlined competition. There are no specific procedures for performing this research.
Instead, the research should be tailored to each acquisition. Different kinds of services also may
call for different approaches. One suggested approach for beginning the market research process
is as follows:

Step 1. Compile an inventory of contracts or interagency agreements concerning similar
functions, including direct and oversight labor costs. The KO is a good resource for identifying
these contracts. After this step, previous engagements have shown, a decision maker should
determine whether DLA chooses to use a public reimbursable or a commercial source of data
from the inventory of analogous contracts. COMPARE uses one or the other on SLCF Line 7.

Step 2. Translate the PWS (SOO) by functional category into the appropriate unit of
measurement (hours, line items, etc.). Because market research will yield data in terms of hourly
rates, it is helpful to understand how many hours it takes to produce each service. Experience
has shown that it is important to account for management hours/duties in a separate category
when translating work into hours. For example, a financial services function has direct work
requirements for invoice processing; if eight invoices are processed per day using two FTEs
worth of hours (16 hours), then each invoice takes an average of 2 hours to process. The key is
to determine whether the processing includes management review time/quality control. If at all
possible, the activity of review and quality control should be captured separately from the
invoice processing activity because it is a separate workload. If management review/quality
control is included in the average processing time (i.e., the 2 hours), these activities should be
noted as part of the category of work.

Step 3. Compute contract direct labor rates for each functional category in the PWS using the
GS grades provided in interagency agreements or direct labor rates from contracts.

Step 4. Extend hourly workloads for each functional category by interagency or contract direct
labor rates (i.e., calculate the total cost of the labor hours for each service). For example, if 2
hours of labor is required to produce a widget according to the PWS and the private sector
charges $100/hour, the total estimated cost for the contractor to produce a widget is $200.
Experience has shown that in modeling private sector costs it is important to document the
elements used as the basis for pricing, i.e., all labor rates, labor category descriptions, and the
justification for and analysis behind selection of a contract and labor category/rate within a
contract.

Step 5. If management FTEs and hours are included in the functional unit under competition,
management and oversight costs should be categorized and priced. If management duties and
workload are not separately stated in the SOO but are included in the direct work hour estimates
(e.g., if 2 hours per invoice includes management FTE/hours), DLA can determine what
percentage of total labor hours are management hours. For example, if 10 percent of the hours
required for each invoice are for management oversight, the 10 percent calculation equates to a

JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                                 48
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


number of hours priced at a manager‘s hourly labor rate as opposed to the rate for a technician
who only processes the invoice.

Step 6. In this step, the KO will enter and certify an estimated contract price or public
reimbursable cost on SLCF Line 7, in accordance with Attachment C of the circular, for a
minimum of three performance periods. This total is computed by adding the results of Steps 4
and 5. COMPARE will then automatically calculate Lines 8, 13, 17, and 18. Explanation of line
items can be found in the COMPARE User‘s Guide.

The Solicitation Method

A second method for conducting the streamlined competition cost comparison involves
solicitation of cost proposals from the private sector in accordance with the FAR. In using this
method, the steps described for the market research method (see Section 5.1.3.2.1 above) should
be followed with the following exceptions.

The KO will issue a draft request for proposals on FedBizOpps.gov to solicit information from
potential offerors instead of conducting market research. The announcement should state that the
government is seeking to identify vendors with the capability of and interest in performing the
services/functions that are the subject of the procurement.
•   Once the draft proposals have been received, the KO will translate the proposals into an
    estimated contract price and enter the data on SLCF Line 7, in accordance with Attachment C
    of Circular A-76, for a minimum of three performance periods.

If the solicitation method is chosen for a streamlined (i.e., non-MEO) competition, the CCSO
may grant a one-time 45-calendar-day extension (added to the usual 90-day streamlined
competition time frame). Such extensions will be granted before public announcement.


5.1.3.2 Adjusted Cost Estimate

The KO will calculate and certify the adjusted costs for SLCF Lines 8, 12, 13, and 17 to
determine and certify a cost-effective source, as reflected on SLCF Line 18, in accordance with
Attachment C of OMB Circular A-76. The KO will not calculate any other SLCF lines for a
streamlined competition.




JULY 20, 2011                                                 CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                               49
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


                         Figure 5-2 Streamlined Competition Form




JULY 20, 2011                                          CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                             50
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK



5.1.3.3 Cost Estimate Firewalls

The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will ensure that the person(s) preparing the ACE and the
person(s) preparing the private sector/public reimbursable cost estimate are different and will not
share information concerning their respective estimates.

5.1.4 Summary of the Streamlined Process

There are several major differences between the streamlined competition, the streamlined
competition with an MEO, and a standard A-76 competition.

OMB Circular A-76 allows streamlined competitions for those functions that are performed by
fewer than 65 FTEs. However, DOD allows streamlined competitions to be performed only for
those activities involving 9 or fewer FTEs, as a matter of policy. A further criterion is that the
development of an MEO is required by DOD for all A-76 competitions which involve 10 or
more FTEs. It‘s very likely that the time required for development of a viable MEO, will not be
able to be accomplished in a timely fashion to allow completion of the entire process in the 90
days permitted. The RA will coordinate with J-75 and the Contracting Officer before deciding
on a streamlined competition.
As mentioned previously, although there is no formal PWS requirement for streamlined
competitions, work requirements still will be identified. For competitions for which a PWS is
not developed, work outcomes are described in an SOO. The RA will develop an SOO
regardless of the type of streamlined competition it plans to conduct.
The time frame for a streamlined competition without an MEO is 90 calendar days. If the RA
chooses to develop an MEO or issues a solicitation, the time frame for the competition can be
extended to 135 calendar days (the basic 90-day period plus one 45-day extension) if granted by
the CCSO. OSD has indicated a preference for using only a standard competition when an MEO
is required. If the RA cannot complete an announced streamlined competition within the time
limit, the RA will convert the streamlined competition to a standard competition or, for a
streamlined competition with an MEO, request an additional extension from OMB through the
agency and the Office of Secretary of Defense Competitive Sourcing Official using the deviation
procedure in paragraph 5.c. of OMB Circular A-76.
The work that is described in the SOO should be compared to comparable service offerings in
the private sector. The KO either will survey the marketplace to determine what the cost of the
service is in the private sector or should solicit private sector offers. The Internet is a useful tool
for such research. Personal interviews with service providers (SP) in the private sector may also
be conducted.
Because a public competition is not required for streamlined competitions, the ACE should be
entered into COMPARE and compared to the results of the market research survey. If the ACE
is the lower cost, the work should remain in house and DLA should either maintain its current


   Extensions can only be granted if an MEO is created and must be requested before announcement of the competition.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                 CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                                            51
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


organization or implement the MEO. If the agency cost is higher than the market research cost,
the RA is required to develop a solicitation for the work of that function.

If the work will remain in house with the DLA workforce, the KO will issue a letter of obligation
(see Appendix R). If the work will not be performed by the in-house workforce, the KO should
develop and publish a solicitation to select a private sector or public reimbursable SP. The KO is
responsible for publishing the results of the competition on FedBizOpps.gov. In addition, the RA
is required to implement post-competition activities in accordance with Circular A-76 and this
Guidebook.

5.2     STREAMLINED COMPETITION PERFORMANCE DECISION PROCESS

5.2.1 SLCF Certifications

To reach a performance decision, the agency will make three certifications on the SLCF in
accordance with Attachment C of Circular A-76. These certifications are made by the CSO
(performance decision), the ATO (estimated cost of agency performance or public reimbursable
performance), and the KO (estimated cost of private sector or public reimbursable performance).
A different person will make each certification.

5.2.2 SLCF Review

Consistent with procurement integrity, ethics, and standards-of-conduct rules, including the
restrictions of 18 U.S.C. § 208, the SSA will allow incumbent SPs to review the SLCF before the
public announcement of a performance decision.

5.2.3 Public Announcement

The agency will make a formal public announcement (at the local level and via FedBizOpps.gov)
of the performance decision. When the performance decision has been made, the Contracting
Officer will publish an announcement of the decision on FebBizOpps.gov and the Competitive
Sourcing Division will work with the Requiring Activity, the Office of Public Affairs, the
Legislative Affairs Office, and Human Resources (J-1) to notify the appropriate officials in the
chain of command, congressional delegations, (e.g., those associated with the local competition
area), affected employees and their representatives (e.g., union officials), affected contractors,
and the local community. During the transfer of responsibility, all federal human resources,
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), and solicitation requirements should be followed. The
phase-in period ends when all terms and conditions of the SP and the RA phase-in plans have
been met. In addition, the SLCF will be made available to the public upon request. However, if
the ACE includes any support contracts, the agency will not release any proprietary information
contained in these contracts.

5.2.4 Implementing the Streamlined Performance Decision

The RA will implement the performance decision resulting from a streamlined competition as
follows:



JULY 20, 2011                                                 CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                               52
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


         In the event of an in-house loss (private sector price or public reimbursable cost estimate
          is lower than the total cost of agency performance), the KO may issue a solicitation to
          select a private sector or a public reimbursable SP. For a private sector performance
          decision, the KO will award a contract in accordance with the FAR and will implement
          FAR 7.305(c), the right of first refusal. For a public reimbursable performance decision,
          the KO will execute a fee-for-service agreement with the public reimbursable source.
         In the event of an in-house win (cost of agency performance is less than the private sector
          price or public reimbursable cost estimate), the KO and the official responsible for
          performing the commercial activity will execute a letter of obligation.


5.3       COMMUNICATIONS DURING THE COMPETITION

         For a Streamlined Cost Comparisons, the Activity Under Competition announces the
          conversion after the contract is signed but before it is provided to the contractor.
Please see Section 6.1.11, Communications During The Competitive Process.




JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 5—STREAMLINED COMPETITION
                                                  53
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


6   STANDARD COMPETITION

                                       A-76 Life Cycle
                                                                      Follow on
                                                                     Competition    Perform Post
                          IGCA-FAIR             Preliminary
                                                                                     Competition
                          Inventory              Planning
                                                                                    Accountability




                              Competition          Public
        Perform Team                           Announcement
          Selection                             (Official Start
                                                     Date)                         Award Contract,
                                                                                   Fee-For Service
                                                                                    Agreement, or
                                                                                    Issue Letter of
                                                                                      Obligation
        Develop PWS
       And Solicitation




                                                                                        Make
                          Develop Offers     Receive Offers                          Performance
       Issue PWS and                                              Perform Source
                           And Agency         And Agency                           Decision (Official
         Solicitation                                                Selection
                             Tender             Tender                                End Date)




      Note: After Public Annoncement of Competition, the PWS Team Lead appoints PWS
team members (see Section 3.2.7: Determining Roles and Responsibilities)

6.1   PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT DEVELOPMENT THROUGH SOLICITATION
ACTIVITIES

6.1.1 Performance Work Statement Development

After the Public Announcement and the appointment of the PWS team members, the
Performance Work Statement (PWS) can be written. This document is the cornerstone of the
competition process. It details the work to be performed, performance standards, and
requirements. The PWS is used by all offerors (including the Agency Tender) in developing
their offers for performing the work.

The PWS should be written in a narrative form that details all requirements that will be met. It
should be written in precise terms with clear, concise wording. Preparers should avoid using
overly technical language and ambiguous terminology that cannot be enforced and should avoid
use of the passive voice. PWS team members should also ensure that they use consistent
terminology and legally enforceable language (i.e., ―shall‖). Any terminology that is specific to
the activity under competition should be defined within the documented PWS.



JULY 20, 2011                                                        CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                  54
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Key elements of a PWS include a statement of required services, including output; the location
of the products/services to be provided; performance periods; measurable performance standards
for the output; and an APL or allowable error rate.

To the greatest extent practicable, the PWS should allow for the use of performance-based
methods for acquiring services. Further discussion of performance-based contracting is provided
in the Guidebook for Performance-Based Acquisition in the Department of Defense (December
2000). Allowing for use of performance-based contracts encourages innovation and
development of cost saving methods not typically encouraged by a more prescriptive contract
format.

The PWS becomes Section C of the solicitation. The following sections will be developed for a
complete Section C:

Section C-1—General Information. General information, including general scope of work,
general operating conditions, personnel matters, and other relevant information (this includes
security issues, contingency operations, etc.)
Section C-2—Definitions. Definitions of all special terms, phrases, and acronyms used
throughout the PWS
Section C-3—Government-Furnished Items and Services. Government-furnished property
(GFP) and government-furnished services provided to the SP for use in executing the PWS
activities
Section C-4—Service Provider-Furnished Items and Services. Details of those items the SP
is required to provide in executing the PWS activities
Section C-5—Requirements. Specific tasks that the SP is required to perform, including
outputs and outcomes and quality control (QC) requirements
Section C-6—References. Applicable directives, publications, instructions, forms and reports

Section C-7 – Technical Exhibits. A listing of the technical exhibits with number and title.
This includes information on items such as GFP, systems, training, and support services; SP-
furnished training; maps; etc.

The PWS should state that all of the SP‘s QC records are subject to inspection by the Quality
Assurance Evaluator (QAE) or Contracting Officer‘s Technical Representative (COTR) at any
time without prior notice and that all such records become the property of the government once
the period of performance is completed/terminated.

The PWS should also include a technical exhibit that lists the GFP (including information,
facilities, equipment, materials, and supplies) to be furnished to the SP. Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) guidance favors furnishing most property to maximize investment on behalf
of the taxpayer. However, it will be acknowledged that some GFP may degrade the SP‘s
performance (e.g., GFP that is in use simply because funds are not available for replacement,
regardless of its level of efficiency or effectiveness). The recommended approach is to provide
GFP that is effective and efficient and not to furnish non-value-added or antiquated property;

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                               55
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


property slated for disposal before the end of the performance period; or joint-use property,
where the need for coordination between parties may create significant delays. This approach
promotes the furnishing of the most current property.

Except as otherwise stated in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 51.201, Interagency Fleet
Management System vehicles and related services will not be provided for contractor use.

An example of a PWS can be found in the online DLA A-76 Competitive Sourcing Internet
Library & Directory at: http://www.dla.mil/j-3/A-76/A-76Main.html,on the Office of the
Secretary of Defense‘s (OSD) SHARE A-76 website at:
http://sharea76.fedworx.org/inst/sharea76.nsf/CONTDEFLOOK/HOME-INDEX, and on
DSCC‘s website at: http://www.supply.dla.mil/A76.

6.1.2 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

The QASP describes the procedures to be used by the continuing government activity (CGA),
the government organization monitoring the SP, to ensure that the SP is meeting the minimum
requirements of the PWS. The primary focus of the QASP is verifying that the SP‘s quality
control program is running effectively. The QASP provides instructions to the QAE and
comprises the CGA‘s overall quality assurance surveillance strategy, surveillance descriptions,
descriptions of required QC submittals, the PRS, available resources, instructions on issuing
contract discrepancy reports, and methodologies for calculating monetary awards or deductions
to be recommended by the COTR to the Contracting Officer (KO).

The QASP motivates the SP to stay on top of quality issues as they develop and to take
corrective and preventive actions before any government action is necessary. It places QC
responsibility on the SP, not the CGA. If properly designed and implemented, the QASP should
ensure that at least 90 percent of the quality management burden is on the SP and 10 percent or
less on the CGA.

An example of a QASP can be found in the online DLA A-76 Competitive Sourcing Internet
Library & Directory at http://www.dla.mil/j-3/A-76/A-76Main.html and on OSD‘s SHARE A-
76! website at http://sharea76.fedworx.org/inst/sharea76.nsf/CONTDEFLOOK/HOME-INDEX.

6.1.3 PWS Draft Review

An extensive, multifaceted review of the PWS shall be conducted to ensure that the document is
accurate, complete, and enforceable. This review shall involve direct review by key persons in
the competition process, as well as review by and coordination with various stakeholders.

As a stakeholder and a member of the PWS team, the KO will assist in ensuring that the PWS is
procurable and enforceable. To ensure that the PWS achieves these goals, draft versions of the
document should be released for review and comment. The KO, in coordination with the RA, is
responsible for releasing any draft of the PWS to the public. Both internal and external
stakeholders should review any draft releases of the PWS during its development. Stakeholder
participation in PWS development and review helps ensure adequate coverage of any functions
performed in support of the stakeholder, including establishment of appropriate performance
measures. Internal sources are typically the government employees affected by the competition,

JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                               56
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


such as supervisors, work leaders, and functional employees. External sources include the host
activity, military customers, HQ, and public reimbursable providers. The RA or activity under
competition is encouraged to document information about stakeholder participation, including
the date, the PWS version, participant name(s), and participant contributions, to ensure that any
future questions about the incorporation of customer requirements can be addressed.

In addition, to ensure that the important issues raised during PWS preparation are adequately
reflected and resolved, the activity under competition should review the PWS and QASP. This
process may include determining whether business-related matters have been adequately
addressed, ensuring that the boundaries of the competition have been adequately defined,
ensuring that the PWS is performance based and focused on desired outcomes rather than
process based, and reviewing surge requirements for accuracy.

The RA will provide the PWS to the CSD for a high-level review before the solicitation is
issued. The appropriate analyst in CSD is responsible for accepting the document at HQ,
sending it out to an established list of reviewers, reviewing comments received, and
consolidating and sending these comments to the RA to resolve before the PWS is turned over to
the KO for inclusion in the RFP.

The KO is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the PWS is adequate and appropriate to serve
as a basis for award. Once the PWS is turned over to the KO for incorporation into an RFP, the
KO assumes responsibility for the document. Any PWS version, before RFP release, gets
released to either all potential offerors or none.

6.1.4 Developing the Continuing Government Activity

The CGA is the independent government activity responsible for the administrative and
management oversight of the SP once a competition decision has been made and implemented.
The CGA, which is formed by the RA, consists of QAEs and other administrative positions
common to Agency Tender and contractor decision scenarios. It will monitor the SP to ensure
that it is meeting the PWS requirements, meeting performance standards, and implementing its
quality control/quality surveillance plan. It is important to clearly identify the CGA‘s
responsibilities to ensure that they are not performing requirements included in the PWS. In
addition, because the CGA plays such a key role in post-competition activities, it is important
that it be established early, position descriptions defined, and be adequately staffed with
personnel who are technically competent and trained. CGA staff will completely understand
their roles and responsibilities before the start of the performance period.

The CGA should be formed as soon as possible, preferably 12 months before the transition to a
new SP. The RA, which forms the CGA, should investigate options for recruiting employees
who are interested in working in the CGA, have the appropriate knowledge base, and are able to
dedicate their efforts full time to CGA activities. Because the size of the CGA directly affects
the savings to be gained from the competition, the decision on the number of CGA positions
should be made with care. The activity should be no larger than necessary, but sufficient for the
meaningful oversight of the selected SP and performance of other governmental functions not
included as part of the competition. Once potential CGA personnel have been identified, they
should be adequately trained in their new roles and responsibilities. Appendix I presents

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                57
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


examples of training and knowledge requirements for CGA personnel. It is also important that
the RA establish procedures for filling positions in the event that personnel changes occur due to
priority placement process or other unforeseen personnel losses. CGA personnel positions
should be determined prior to the start of the first performance period. If the requirement for
additional CGA personnel occurs after the performance decision has been implemented, the RA
will notify the CSD prior to establishing additional CGA positions.

The RA will establish the requirements for the CGA. At a minimum the activity will be
responsible for updating and implementing the QASP. These updates are required to ensure that
the QASP addresses the QC approach submitted by the selected SP. The CGA is responsible for
monitoring the SP through all performance periods and should keep performance records to be
used as past-performance data for future competitions. The CGA, in conjunction with the RA,
also should update operating procedures to reflect these requirements and should assist the
Human Resources (HR) Office in developing new CGA position descriptions.

6.1.5 Develop the Acquisition Plan

The development of the acquisition strategy takes place during preliminary planning (described
in Chapter 3). Further acquisition planning occurs with the preparation of the acquisition plan
(AP), which will be developed and approved before solicitation release. The AP details the
approach to and the methodology for procurement. Within the AP, the Contracting Officer (KO)
will establish the type of contract: fixed price, cost reimbursement, or a mixed type. Incentive
contracts or award fee contracts (e.g., fixed price plus award fee) are generally preferred to fixed
price or cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts. If a performance bond is requested from a private source,
the KO will include a separate contract line item number (CLIN) in the solicitation for the cost of
the performance bond but will not include this cost in the contract price entered on Standard
Competition Form (SCF) Line 7.

The Circular provides for one of the following negotiated acquisition types to be used to conduct
a standard competition. In addition, the selected type will be indicated in the SSP.

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA). In the use of the LPTA method, the
performance decision, determined by price analysis and cost realism, is based on the lowest cost
of all offers and tenders, as well as on technical feasibility. LPTA source selection will be
conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart 15, and OMB Circular A-76 Attachment B-D.5.b(1).
Phased Evaluation. A phased evaluation source selection is more complex because it involves
two steps or phases. Phase 1 consists of KO evaluation of the technical capability of all offers
and tenders. In Phase 2, all offers and tenders determined in Phase 1 to be technically acceptable
are evaluated based on cost. This evaluation includes a cost analysis, determination of the cost
realism of the private sector proposals, public reimbursable cost estimates, and the agency cost
estimate (ACE). The performance decision will be based on the lowest cost of all technically
acceptable offers. Alternate performance standards, differing from the solicitation standard, are

 Price analysis is the process of examining and evaluating a proposed price without evaluating its separate cost elements and
     proposed profit. Determining cost realism entails ascertaining that the costs in an offeror‘s proposal are realistic for the
     work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the various elements of the
     offeror‘s technical proposal.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                         CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                               58
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


permissible, provided that the offeror submits an explanation of the ways in which the alternate
standards differ from the solicitation standards, the cost of meeting each alternate standard, the
cost difference between the alternate and the solicitation performance standard, a cost-benefit
analysis explaining the rationale for each alternate standard, and proposed language for including
the alternate performance standards in the amended solicitation. Further information on the
phased evaluation source selection can be found in OMB Circular A-76 Attachment B-D.5.b(2).
Tradeoff Source Selection Process. A tradeoff source selection may be appropriate in a
standard competition when the organization wishes to consider award to other than the lowest
priced source. DLA may use the tradeoff processes under FAR Subpart 15.101-1 in a standard
competition of (a) information technology activities (b) commercial activities performed by a
private sector source; (c) new requirements; or (d) segregable expansions. An agency also may
use a tradeoff source selection process for a specific standard competition if prior to the public
announcement of the competition, the CSO approves, in writing, the use of the tradeoff source
selection process; and (b) notifies OMB of the approval by forwarding a copy of the written
approval. Under a tradeoff source selection process, DLA may select an offer or tender that is not
the lowest priced offer or tender only if the decision is within the agency‘s budgetary limitation.

The KO, in conjunction with the PWS team, is responsible for providing acquisition strategy
recommendations to the SSA for approval. Access to AP documents is limited to appointed
source selection officials, in accordance with FAR 3.104.

6.1.6 Develop the Source Selection Plan

The source selection plan (SSP) is the written guide for the source selection process. It presents
the source selection organization and responsibilities; the proposed evaluation factors, any
significant subfactors, and their relative importance; the evaluation process, including specific
procedures and techniques; and a schedule of significant events in the source selection process
before public announcement. The SSP forms the basis for Sections L and M of the request for
proposals (RFP) and will be formally approved by the SSA prior to solicitation release.

Developing the evaluation criteria is an interactive process that should involve the KO, the
Requiring Activity (RA), and the Performance Work Statement (PWS) team. The involvement
of these personnel ensures that the evaluation criteria do not change between the release of the
solicitation and the evaluation of offers.

Access to the SSP is limited to appointed source selection officials, in accordance with FAR
3.104.

6.1.7 Conduct Formal Pre-Solicitation Activities

Formal actions relating to the solicitation begin with publishing a pre-solicitation announcement
on FedBizOpps.gov and other appropriate media, and notifying private industry of the
availability of a draft RFP or scheduling an industry day or pre-solicitation conference. In
addition to announcing the draft or event, the announcement should state that the government is
seeking to identify vendors with the capability of and an interest in performing the
services/functions that are the subject of the procurement. Once the FedBizOpps.gov notice is
published, FAR constraints on the procurement process apply. The KO is responsible for

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                59
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


preparing a synopsis of the work to be competed but will work with the PWS team to develop a
description of the PWS requirements.

The KO will use informal market research to determine appropriate pre-solicitation activities. If
similar A-76 procurements have recently been performed, issuance of a Sources Sought Notice
may be sufficient to build a list of potential offerors. If, however, the KO does not have previous
experience with the services in the PWS or the related industry and has not previously seen this
type of business opportunity from DLA, he or she may find it advantageous to conduct an
industry day or pre-solicitation conference. These events facilitate the exchange of ideas and
information between government and industry with the intended result of promoting industry
interest in submitting offers in response to the solicitation and providing the government with
information for the refinement or improvement of the solicitation. It is recommended that a draft
requirements document/PWS/statement of objectives (SOO) be issued in conjunction with the
industry day/pre-solicitation conference. The KO is responsible for preparing the agenda and
assigning responsibilities for the industry day/pre-solicitation meeting. Briefings at the meeting
should include a discussion of information pertinent to the activity under competition. During
this meeting, private industry is given an opportunity to comment on the draft requirements
document/PWS/SOO. Industry comments can be provided orally during the meeting or in
writing. Written comments can be submitted before or after the meeting. Attendees should be
advised that the pre-solicitation information they provide is for government use and may or may
not be used in the ensuing solicitation. The KO will then analyze industry inputs for
incorporation into the relevant portions of the solicitation.

The FAR addresses the required actions for locating commercial sources as a special situation
pertaining to procurements associated with an A-76 competition. The KO may not conclude that
there are no commercial sources capable of providing the required supplies or services until the
requirement has been publicized through FedBizOpps.gov at least three times in a 90-calendar-
day period, with a minimum of 30 calendar days between notices. When the supplies and
services being competed are necessary to meet an urgent requirement, this requirement may be
limited to a total of two notices through FedBizOpps.gov in a 30-calendar-day period, with a
minimum of 15 calendar days between the two. If three notices are issued, the announcement of
pre-solicitation activities or the availability of a draft solicitation may be the first of the three; the
second could be the announcement of the availability of the final solicitation; and the third, the
announcement of the pre-proposal conference or the solicitation closing date, as applicable.

6.1.8 Publish Solicitation Announcement

As noted previously, the solicitation will be announced on FedBizOpps.gov. Successful
execution of this step depends on a number of factors, to include the following:

•   A PWS that is performance based, clear, complete, and consistent
•   Effective collaboration between the KO and the PWS team
•   Early agreement on source selection and evaluation criteria

It is the KO‘s responsibility to state in the solicitation whether the acquisition procedure is a
sealed offer or a negotiated procedure. A negotiated procedure may take the form of lowest
price technically acceptable or phased evaluation, or in the case of an IT competition, the KO

JULY 20, 2011                                                         CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                   60
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


may use the tradeoff source selection process. The KO will identify which of these types of
source selection processes applies to the particular solicitation.

The solicitation should state that the Agency Tender is not required to include a labor strike plan,
a small business strategy, a subcontracting plan goal, participation of small disadvantaged
businesses, licensing or certifications, or past performance information, unless the Agency
Tender is based on an MEO that has been implemented in accordance with Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76.

In preparation for the announcement, the KO should review the PWS to ensure that it is adequate
and appropriate to serve as a basis for solicitation and award. The KO has the expertise to make
the language appropriate for contracting purposes and can identify areas where further
clarification is necessary. Once the first draft of the PWS is developed, the KO should work
closely with the PWS team. Beginning this coordination early in the process saves valuable time
later. The KO should announce the solicitation in accordance with FAR requirements.

6.1.9 Develop Independent Government Estimate

The independent government estimate (IGE) establishes the anticipated cost of acquiring the
services in the acquisition. This estimate is required by the FAR and is used by the KO to
determine whether an offeror‘s proposed price is fair and reasonable and reflects an
understanding of the PWS requirements. The IGE document also forms the basis for
commitment of funds by the RA comptroller—a commitment that will take place before the
solicitation can be issued.

Development of the IGE is normally the RA‘s responsibility. Because the IGE is an acquisition
and source selection document, members of the MEO team may not participate in the preparation
of the estimate or be given access to it. Use of consultant support also requires conflict of
interest firewalls. If consultant support is used, different personnel shall be employed to develop
the IGE and the ACE.

Insofar as possible, the IGE should be broken down to reflect the anticipated cost by Contract
Line Item Number (CLIN), and the cost should be further broken down to labor and non-labor
costs.

6.1.10 Conduct Solicitation Activities

The KO is responsible for all aspects of the solicitation. This includes developing and
maintaining a list of potential offerors, publicizing the solicitation, making the solicitation
available to all offerors, and maintaining a library of applicable technical materials, including
directives, instructions, manuals, policy letters, etc. It is highly recommended that the KO use
the Internet to make solicitations, amendments to the solicitation, historical data, and technical
materials available to interested parties.

To facilitate the solicitation process, it is usually beneficial to allow potential offerors to inspect
the facilities where the commercial activities will be performed before they prepare and submit
their offers. It also may be useful for the KO to convene a pre-proposal conference to respond to
all questions. The KO should respond to all questions in writing with an amendment. In

JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                  61
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


addition, the KO is responsible for issuing any amendments to the solicitation resulting from
responses to questions or other changes, such as new contracting instructions. Generally,
offerors should be given at least 45 days from the date the solicitation is issued (depending on
the solicitation‘s complexity) to submit offers. The KO is responsible for receiving and
safeguarding all proposals.

The quality of the PWS is an important element in facilitating a timely response to a solicitation.
A PWS that provides a clear description of the service outputs and the performance standards to
be met promotes timely submission of offers. In contrast, a poor PWS may delay completion of
the process. Other factors that may hinder timely submission of offers include inaccurate
workload figures, ambiguity, or other errors that require the KO to issue amendments. If such
factors arise, the due date for submitting offers may have to be extended. The PWS team is
accountable for ensuring that this information is accurate, complete, and timely.


6.1.10.1        Solicitation Amendments

Past experience has shown that amendments and extensions to the solicitation timeline may be
necessary to clarify questions from offerors or modify PWS requirements. Amendments to the
solicitation are at the discretion of the KO; however any amendment that may affect the
competition decision date will be approved by the CSD. Requests for approval should be
submitted by the KO in writing or by email to the CSD and include the following:

•   Length of proposed extension
•   Reason for extension
•   Potential impact of not granting the extension
•   Steps taken to negate the need for an extension and the resulting outcomes
•   Impact on overall competition schedule if extension is granted

Additionally, the CSD must be notified before the issuance of any amendment proposed for
issuance 30 days or less prior to solicitation closing. Notification should be made in writing and
include:

•   Purpose of the proposed amendment
•   Rationale for not amending earlier and the impact of not amending solicitation
•   Any impact to the competition schedule as a result of the amendment

Once a request for extension or proposed amendment is received by the CSD, the impact on the
competition will be assessed and a final decision to extend or amend the solicitation will be
issued no later than four days following receipt of the request.

6.1.11 Communications During the Competitive Process

It is incumbent on the CA Program Manager to ensure that the leadership of the Activity Under
Competition or designee provides an update, at least monthly during the development and
preparation of the PWS, to civilian employees who will be included in the cost comparison
competition and consider their views on the development and preparation of the PWS and

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                62
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Agency Tender (as required by 10 U.S.C. § 2467). This monthly consultation must be face-to-
face if requested by the organization‘s representative (e.g., union). In those instances where
employees are represented by a labor organization accorded exclusive recognition under 5
U.S.C. § 7111, the consultation requirement is satisfied by consultation with representatives of
that labor organization.

Communication-related meetings should be held with the Activity Under Competition and key
individuals, such as the PWS Competition Team Leader, to ensure that managers/leaders in the
Command have been informed of the goals, objectives, strategy and methodology for conducting
the A-76 competition, and implementing the Action Plan. Roles and responsibilities should be
outlined along with instructions for proper disclosure of data among team members, i.e., who can
discuss what with whom, etc. It is strongly suggested that appropriate legal counsel assist in
explaining the latter.
Once the Activity Under Competition and the Requiring Activity CA Program Manager have
reached consensus on the approach, the Activity Under Competition can convene the first all-
hands meeting. The first all-hands meeting should be held prior to or concurrently with the
public announcement of the competition.
The Activity Under Competition will provide employees with updated milestones/target dates,
and the general status of the competition progress, and should offer the employees an
opportunity to review and to comment on the PWS. To preclude allegations of non-compliance
with this statutory requirement, the Activity Under Competition will summarize the results of
each monthly meeting in a brief memorandum for the record, forward copies to employees‘
representatives, and post copies in the workplace.


6.1.11.1        Communications Planning

Educating employees about the A-76 competitive sourcing process and sharing information
regarding the competition process and potential outcomes can help ease employee concerns.
Union participation is encouraged through all communications forums including video
teleconferences (VTCs). Early in the process, developing and implementing an effective
communications strategy and plan are critically important in establishing and maintaining the
tone for A-76 studies. Communication strategies ensure stakeholders, customers, and most
importantly, affected employees understand the competition requirements and processes and are
not unduly affected by rumors and misunderstandings. It is important that everyone know why
the competition is being conducted, the competition process and timelines, and the potential
impacts to employees and their organization.


6.1.12.2        Strategic Communications Plan
The Communications Plan will provide a methodology for continuous communication including
workforce briefings, monthly meetings, web site information (e.g., posting of Frequently Asked
Questions), an internal CA Newsletter, and local TV radio/newspaper coverage to inform the

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                63
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


public and those affected by the competition. Union participation also offers the opportunity to
consider employee feedback in the A-76 process. The Activity Under Competition is responsible
for ensuring open communication with employees, their representatives, affected ISSA
providers, the local community, and the PWS and Agency Tender Teams during the competition.
An example of a Communications Plan can be found in Appendix S.
The first all-hands meeting for a competition should be held before or concurrently with the
public announcement of the competition and subsequent to Congressional notification when
required. In addition, preliminary planning should include development of a basic
communications plan that provides a process for keeping employees, customers, union
representatives, and other stakeholders informed. The following paragraphs provide minimum
communications requirements; any communications plan should address all of these and any
other requirements that the RA determines will be useful.


6.1.11.3        Employee Communications

The leadership of the activity under competition (or its designee) is required to provide updates
to the civilian employees who will be included in the competition and to consider their views on
the development and preparation of the PWS and the MEO (as required by 10 U.S.C. § 2467).
These updates and consultations will take place at least monthly during development and
preparation of the PWS and the MEO. The monthly consultation will be face to face if requested
by the organization‘s representative (e.g., union). Where employees are represented by a labor
organization accorded exclusive recognition under 5 U.S.C. § 7111, the consultation requirement
is satisfied by consultation with representatives of that labor organization. Any unions that
represent federal employees who will attend the all-hands meeting should be invited in advance
to attend every all-hands meeting concerning the competition.

The activity under competition should provide employees with updated milestones, target dates,
and the general status of the competition. Directly affected employees and their representatives
should be given the opportunity to review the PWS when the KO releases the solicitation. To
avoid allegations of noncompliance with this statutory requirement, the activity under
competition should summarize the results of each monthly meeting in a brief memorandum for
the record, forward copies to employees‘ representatives, and post copies in the workplace.

Educating employees about the A-76 competitive sourcing process and sharing information
regarding the competition process and potential outcomes can help ease employee concerns.
Union participation is encouraged through all communication forums, including VTCs.
Developing and implementing an effective communications strategy and planning early in the
process is critically important to establishing and maintaining the tone for A-76 competitions.
Communications strategies ensure that stakeholders, customers, and most important, affected
employees understand the competition requirements and processes and are not unduly affected
by rumors and misunderstandings. It is important that everyone know why the competition is
being conducted, the competition process and timelines, the potential impacts on employees and
their organization, and employee protest procedures. The communications plan should provide a
methodology for continuous communication, including workforce briefings, monthly meetings,
Web site information (e.g., posting of frequently asked questions), an internal CA newsletter, and

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                               64
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


local media coverage to inform the public and those affected by the competition. The activity
under competition is responsible for ensuring open communication with employees, their
representatives, affected public reimbursable providers, the local community, and the PWS and
MEO teams during the competition. Once they are notified of the competition, affected unions
may propose one or more methods of communicating with employees during the competition
process. Such union proposals should be negotiated with the appropriate union with assistance
from the Human Resources Office (HRO).


6.1.11.4        Additional Communications

Customers also should be provided with relevant and timely information about the upcoming
competition. This communication should begin as early as possible, but certainly before
issuance of the request for proposals. When accomplished early, such communication can create
an opportunity to gain customers‘ buy-in to the process, gain their commitment to providing
input on the performance requirements, and provide personnel to help evaluate offers, if needed.
Customers must be kept informed of the A-76 competition‘s potential impacts on their
relationship with DLA or the services that they depend on DLA to provide. During the planning
stage, the activity under competition and the RA CA Program Manager should plan a series of
meetings with a variety of levels of management within DLA and their major customers. DLA
HQ customer service representatives should be given the opportunity to review the
communications plan and to participate in the meetings with customers. The initial meetings
should be conducted with senior-level management to provide an overview of the functions to be
studied, efforts to ensure continued mission accomplishment during and after the competition,
and any proposed impacts. When relevant, current public reimbursable providers should be
notified of the upcoming competition.

The customer awareness process could consist of briefings and meetings at various levels. In
addition to the initial meeting informing customers of the competition, subsequent meetings
should be held with the activity under competition and key individuals, such as the PWS team
leader, to ensure that customers have been informed of the goals, objectives, strategy, and
methodology for A-76 competition. Roles and responsibilities should be outlined along with
instructions for proper disclosure of data among team members (e.g., who can discuss what and
with whom). Legal counsel should explain to PWS team members any pitfalls involving
disclosure of sensitive information during the A-76 competition. In addition, if there is a large
number or a broad variety of customers or if the A-76 competition may result in large-scale
changes to the way the customer is accustomed to receive service, RAs should consider
developing a separate customer awareness or customer communications plan.

Customers should be encouraged to provide input on performance requirements. Even more
important, they should be made aware of the purpose and the timing of the competition and the
potential changes in the way they will receive services. The SSA/SSAC chair should consider
soliciting a primary customer representative to serve on the SSEB. Customers may include both
external and internal (DLA) individuals or activities. DLA Customer Operations and Readiness
(J-31) should coordinate on the communications plan and is encouraged to participate in
customer forums. DLA HQ personnel should also participate, depending on the level of
customer to be addressed.

JULY 20, 2011                                                    CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                65
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


6.1.11.5         Notification of Unions, Stakeholders, Employees, and the Public

Reference 3.2.13 as to the development and rationale for notifications associated with
communicating competition acitivities to external groups.


6.1.11.6         Release of Public Announcements

In accordance with DODI 4100.33, periodic announcements on plans and progress regarding on-
going competitive sourcing studies will be made to affected employees and other interested
parties including: tenants, local activities, employee groups and unions. DOD is usually notified
prior to public/congressional announcement. This includes the following as a minimum:
         The announcement of the intent to conduct a standard or streamlined competition one day
          after DLA HQ announces the cost comparison to Congress (if required).
         At or following completion of the standard competition form for a standard competition,
          an announcement of the competition decision, to include the start date, and duration of
          the public review and contest period to the employees. In the case of an initial
          performance decision (and therefore a conditional award), the HQ DLA Legislative
          Affairs (DL) will notify Congress at least one day before the Commander or designee
          notifies the work force.
         At the conclusion of the contest period, the Activity Under Competition or designee
          announces the final decision to the employees. In the case of a final contract decision
          (and, therefore, a contract award), the DL will notify Congress before the Activity Under
          Competition or designee notifies the employees. Decisions on each appeal will be
          provided to all offerors and the Government‘s MEO team. While the employees are
          being notified, the KO will notify the final contract decision to all contractors who
          submitted proposals. Once these notifications are complete, the local PAO should notify
          the local media.


6.2       AGENCY TENDER DEVELOPMENT

The Agency Tender is the government‘s response to the solicitation; it describes the
government‘s MEO and is the basis for the government‘s agency cost estimate (ACE). The
MEO should identify the organizational structure, staffing, operating procedures, equipment, and
phase-in and inspection plans necessary to ensure that the in-house activity is performed in the
most efficient and cost-effective manner possible. The Agency Tender consists of several
documents, including the MEO document, an ACE, a quality control plan (QCP), a written
operations plan, a phase-in plan, copies of any existing awarded MEO subcontracts, and any
additional documents required by the RFP. The key tasks in developing the Agency Tender
include gaining an understanding of the PWS and solicitation/RFP, creating the MEO, creating
the QC Plan, developing the ACE, and designing the phase-in plan. Ultimately the Agency
Tender shall be developed to meet all the requirements listed in the final RFP.


JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                  66
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


6.2.1 Review and Understand Performance Work Statement (PWS)


6.2.1.1         Gain Understanding of the PWS and Solicitation/Request for Proposal

The PWS forms the core of the solicitation. All offerors, including the MEO team, shall
understand all sections of the solicitation. Section C, Requirements; Section L, Instructions,
Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents; and Section M, Evaluation Factors for
Award, typically apply to the Agency Tender; however, there should be a thorough review of the
entire solicitation to identify the sections that should be addressed. All final management
decisions regarding the Agency Tender are made by the ATO. This official, along with the MEO
team, is responsible for reviewing the Agency Tender in conjunction with any solicitation
amendments and for incorporating changes as required. If the ATO or the MEO team has any
questions about RFP requirements, it should submit the questions to the Contracting Office in
accordance with the instructions in Section L. All Agency Tender documents should conform to
the requirements listed in the RFP.


6.2.1.2         Document the As-Is Organization

Documenting the as-is organization is not a requirement for developing the MEO but can be
useful to the MEO team in developing the Agency Tender. If the decision is made to document
the as-is organization, the MEO team should begin with a profile of the organization as it is at
the start of the competition. This profile can include a description of the organizational structure
(both formal and informal), the mission and functions, staffing plans, facilities, and equipment.
In documenting the staffing for the existing organization, the MEO team should identify all staff
assigned to the function, including full-time, part-time, and temporary government employees;
military personnel; and any contractor employees currently participating in the activity under
competition.

It may also be beneficial to review the PWS workload and performance requirements to begin a
crosswalk of the PWS to as-is cycle times. This crosswalk will be used to establish a PWS-
required FTE baseline. The MEO should be designed to provide all of the services required in
the PWS; thus, it is beneficial to map the MEO to the PWS to help ensure that no PWS
requirements have been missed. This crosswalk can be used to identify and optimize as-is cycle
times, as-is organizational structure, as-is staffing requirements, as-is operating procedures, and
as-is facility and equipment requirements. It is important to keep in mind that the PWS
considers work outputs; it does not consider questions of frequency, method, or procedure
(unless a procedure is mandated). Therefore, the MEO team may want to obtain copies of
previous reports or studies that specify the volume of work, resource requirements, productivity
rates, performance requirements and standards, or performance times. This information can be
used to define FTE requirements over each 12-month performance period, the first of which
begins at contract start (unless the solicitation requires that the phase-in be the first performance
period).


6.2.1.3         Analyze the As-Is Organization

JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                 67
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




The MEO team may choose to analyze the as-is organization data to identify its main problems
and inefficiencies. Techniques that can be used for the analysis include analysis of historical
data, work sampling, technical estimates, and other forecasting techniques. This includes
analysis of the historical workload data collected during PWS development. The team can use
this analysis to determine the resources needed to fulfill the workload requirements in the PWS.
Alternatives to the present organization should be developed into specific recommendations for
MEO implementation. The team should focus on innovative and creative approaches to add
value when performing the function outlined in the PWS. In this effort, the team should use
business process reengineering and industrial engineering principles, best practices, workflow
diagrams, lean six sigma, and business case and organizational analyses.


6.2.1.4         Develop the MEO

The MEO team should document all processes relative to the PWS to determine the to-be
organization (i.e., the MEO) and to identify how to implement it with the optimum (i.e., most
efficient) amount and combination of resources. In building the MEO, the MEO team should
prioritize key processes (high impact and resource-consuming). Flowcharts or diagrams can
reveal areas in which process improvements may provide greater efficiency. The MEO team
may consider benchmarking against similar DOD or other federal organizations and commercial
businesses to identify the latest techniques, innovations, and best practices for use in developing
the MEO. The personnel area usually represents the largest costs. Cost savings in this area can
be realized by reducing staff through new technology, better methods, and cross-utilization of
multi-skilled people. Process improvements that shall be included in the Agency Tender as part
of the selection process are based on fulfilling PWS requirements with the greatest possible cost
savings. However, it is important to note that the MEO cannot include new MEO subcontracts
that would result in the direct conversion of work being performed by government employees to
private contract. The ATO may propose the consolidation of existing contracts in the agency
tender and may use established government wide contract vehicles to do so.

The MEO team‘s objective should be to develop an Agency Tender that is responsive to the
solicitation, is adequately staffed to meet the workload requirements defined in the PWS, is
competitive, and can perform at the defined APLs. The MEO shall follow a logical format and
maintain references to all backup and source documentation. Analyzing processes, evaluating
performance metrics, and developing an organization from the ground up shall accomplish these
goals.

The MEO should address all requirements stated in the solicitation. These requirements often
call for an organization chart reflecting the MEO; position descriptions classified by HRA for the
positions projected to be in the MEO; a description of how the proposed organization shall
execute the QCP; MEO equipment, supplies, material, and facilities; and specific details of MEO
subcontracts.

The HRA, along with the Human Resources Office, should support the MEO team with position
management advisory services, monitor implementation of the position structure improvements
in the MEO, and ensure accurate job classifications. The HRA is a human resources expert who

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                68
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


participates on the MEO team and helps create the Agency Tender. He or she is responsible for
scheduling and maintaining milestones related to human resource endeavors; advising on
position classification restrictions; classifying position descriptions, including exemptions;
making sure sufficient labor is available to staff the MEO and implement the phase-in plan; and
helping to develop the ACE by providing annual salaries and wages. The HRA also develops an
employee transition plan for the incumbent SP.

The MEO team should take particular care in documenting the assumptions used in the
development of the Agency Tender and the ACE. If additional research is performed (such as
time studies, process mapping, or benchmarking) this shall also be documented.


6.2.1.5         Develop the Phase-in Plan

The phase-in plan contains the actions and timelines required for successful progress from the
current organization to the new SP. For a standard competition, the KO will require a phase-in
plan from all offerors, including the MEO. A separate contract line item number (CLIN) for a
phase-in plan shall be included in the solicitation. This CLIN is limited to phase-in costs related
to the phase-in actions as described in the phase-in plan. The MEO team shall submit its own
phase-in plan stating how it shall transition to performance of the competed functions and
replace the incumbent SP(s), as well as how it shall address all applicable solicitation
requirements. Private and public reimbursable sources shall meet the same requirements

The purpose of the phase-in plan is to minimize startup confusion, disruption, and adverse
impacts on operations and customer support when transferring responsibility from the current
organization to the SP based on the final competition decision. The ideal situation is for the
phase-in to be transparent to the customers. However, contingency plans should also be
developed to prepare for other eventualities and to promote a smooth transition. The MEO and
the contractor phase-in plan shall both address the RFP phase-in plan requirements, which
include timeline, employee hiring/placement, and other startup activities. The MEO and
contractor phase-in plans shall also describe the performance indicators that shall define
successful implementation of the SP‘s phase-in plan.


6.2.1.6         Develop the Quality Control Plan

The QCP documents how the MEO shall meet and comply with the quality standards established
in the solicitation. At a minimum, the QCP shall include a self-inspection plan, an internal
staffing plan, and an outline of the procedures that the MEO shall use to maintain quality,
timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and any other requirements set forth in the
solicitation.

The SP is responsible for QC of services and the proper functioning of the QC program. A good
SP QCP addresses all aspects of quality management at all levels of the SP‘s organization. If the
QC program is functioning properly, the SP‘s services should be meeting the APLs set forth in
the PWS. Whenever there is a dip below a particular APL, the SP‘s QC program should
automatically kick in to institute corrective measures (which fix the immediate quality problem)

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                69
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


and preventive measures (which help prevent future occurrences). The SP also should prepare
periodic quality discrepancy reports (QDR) regarding any such quality slippages and forward
these to the KO or designee until the slippage is corrected. When constructing the QC program,
consideration should be given to which existing systems will provide what quality control data. It
may be necessary to augment or modify data systems to achieve an acceptable QC Program.

6.2.2 Performing the Independent Review

The A-76 independent review (IR) step required under the old OMB Circular A-76 (Revised
1999) was not included in the May 29, 2003, revision to OMB Circular A-76. However,
conducting an independent review to check for adequacy, accuracy, and completeness of an
agency tender is considered a commercial best practice and helps ensure the final offer submitted
by an ATO has no potentially fatal deficiencies or weaknesses, is adequately resourced, is
supportable by the Requiring Activity (RA), and addresses all of the solicitation‘s requirements.

RA ATOs are strongly encouraged to use the IR process to validate their agency tenders prior to
submittal at bid closing; however, the decision to use the IR process is at the complete discretion
of the RA‘s ATO. The ATO may accept or reject any of the recommendations that may result
from an IR of an agency tender.

The following are suggested best practices for conducting an IR:

         1. The ATO should designate an Independent Review Team Lead (IRTL).

         2. The IRTL should:

                   a. form an internal ―Red Team‖ within the RA staffed with appropriate subject
                      matter experts, pricing analysts, and counsel to independently review the
                      agency tender; or,

                   b. obtain a third party to carry out the IR. The RA‘s Office of Review, the DLA
                      Office of Operations Research and Analysis, or an outside consultant are
                      available options for this purpose.

         3. The IR should focus on the following agency tender deliverables:

                   a. Price;

                   b. Management Plan1

                             i. Oral Presentation of the Technical Plan

                            ii. Surge/Sustainment/Mobilization Plan

                           iii. Quality Control/Customer Satisfaction Plan


1 Components of the agency tender‘s management plan may vary depending on the solicitation‘s requirements for an offeror to
    be considered responsive.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                      CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                             70
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


                       iv. Phase-In Plan

                 c. Past Performance when involving an MEO as the current service provider.

All parties participating in an agency tender IR must sign non-disclosure statements and cannot
participate in any aspect of preliminary planning/performance work statement development nor
in source selection evaluation associated with the solicitation.

6.2.3 Gathering and Analyzing Current Cost Information

The ACE details the government cost for performing the activity under competition. In
preparing the ACE, it is important to document all costs associated with the Agency Tender.
Examples of costs typically included in the ACE are:

•   Personnel costs
•   Material and supply costs
•   Other specifically attributable costs
       – Depreciation
       – Facilities
       – Cost of capital
       – Rent
       – Utilities
       – Insurance
       – Travel
       – MEO subcontracts
       – Maintenance and repair
       – Other costs

This data is entered into the government‘s cost comparison software program (COMPARE). The
values entered into COMPARE represent information derived from more detailed workload,
position, and resource analyses. The resulting Standard Competition Form (SCF) (see Figure 6-
2) is used to compare the estimated cost of in-house performance with the cost of public
reimbursable/contract performance to aid in the performance decision.

All DOD components are required to use both the DOD A-76 Costing Manual and COMPARE
to prepare the Agency Cost Estimate for both streamlined and standard cost comparisons. The
Agency Cost Estimate (ACE) shall be developed in accordance with the Costing Manual and
with Attachment C of OMB Circular A-76. The CLIN structure should be the guide for the
assignment of functional costs in the ACE.

Standard competitions will include the conversion differential, which is defined as a cost that is
the lesser of 10 percent of the MEO‘s personnel-related costs (reflected on the SCF Line 1) or
$10 million over all of the performance periods stated in the solicitation. This amount is added
to the cost of the non-incumbent source and is meant to capture non-quantifiable costs related to
a conversion.


6.2.3.1         Backup Documentation

JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                71
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




It is important, while gathering cost information, that an auditable process for data collection is
maintained. Data that is entered into COMPARE requires detailed backup documentation,
preferably compiled in an organized fashion. For instance, creating a ―Summary of Cost‖
binder, tabbed according to the corresponding lines in COMPARE, provides an auditor a
roadmap to how the costs were determined with copies of documentation (material, supplies,
subcontracts, etc). This establishes a sound costing methodology that can endure an IR and is
beneficial to the review of the COMPARE file by the contracting office during the Source
Selection Evaluation process.


6.2.3.2         CLIN Requirements

Data inserted into COMPARE may need to be collected and documented based not only on
COMPARE lines, but also based on CLIN requirements. While COMPARE computes the total
cost per line, establishing functional areas to correspond with CLIN requirements allows the user
to query data from COMPARE to complete Section B of the solicitation. As an example, a
FTE‘s time (as well as material or supply costs) may fall under multiple CLINs, and thus is
fractionally accounted for in Line 1 based on the corresponding CLIN as defined in the
functional area.




JULY 20, 2011                                                      CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                 72
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Figure 6-2 Standard Competition Form




JULY 20, 2011                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                             73
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


6.2.4 Adjusting Cost Information to the Requirements of the Agency Tender

The data collected for the current organization should be adjusted to reflect the requirements of
the MEO before the data is included in the SCF. All MEO-related costs, such as office supplies
and safety equipment, can be adjusted to the new FTE count in the MEO. Any equipment,
supplies, facilities, or other costs associated with process improvements in the MEO, phase-in
plan, or QCP also shall be identified and included in the SCF. It is important to review the PWS
for additional costs, such as training and security clearance requirements.

6.2.5 OMB Cost Factors

All costs in the government‘s offer are adjusted for the first performance period according to the
inflation factors published by OMB. Detailed information on the use of inflation factors in the
remaining years of the performance period is available in the DOD A-76 Costing Manual (DOD
4100.33). Current inflation factors are available for downloading at http://compare.mevatec.com
and are published by OMB through its A-76 transmittal memorandums. Current salary rates and
locality pay are available at http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/indexGS.asp.

6.2.6 Entering Information in COMPARE

The COMPARE software program will automatically calculate each year‘s costs over the life of
the proposed contract. It also will provide detailed worksheets for review by the ATO and a
completed SCF, ready for signatures. The COMPARE program and user manual are available
for downloading at http://www.comparea76.com.

6.2.7 Competitive Sourcing Program Performance Measures

In order to not exceed DLA‘s A-76 competition budget, it is important for Requiring Activities
to accurately account for competition costs and manage them effectively. Requiring Activities
can play a significant role in containing costs by establishing realistic competition timelines and
budgets and holding the PWS and Management Plan Competition Teams accountable through
communication. The CSD (J-75) will establish clear performance measures by which the
Competitive Sourcing Program will be evaluated. Performance measures may include timelines,
quality, and cost standards for the competition process. Accurate and timely tracking of
competition schedules and costs can enable program management to make necessary course
corrections that can help contain overall competition costs.




JULY 20, 2011                                                     CHAPTER 6—STANDARD COMPETITION
                                                74
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


6.3      SOURCE SELECTION

                                 A-76 Life Cycle
                                                               Follow on
                                                              Competition    Perform Post
                    IGCA-FAIR            Preliminary
                                                                              Competition
                    Inventory             Planning
                                                                             Accountability




                        Competition         Public
  Perform Team                          Announcement
    Selection                            (Official Start
                                              Date)                         Award Contract,
                                                                            Fee-For Service
                                                                             Agreement, or
                                                                             Issue Letter of
                                                                               Obligation
  Develop PWS
 And Solicitation




                                                                                 Make
                    Develop Offers    Receive Offers                          Performance
 Issue PWS and                                             Perform Source
                     And Agency        And Agency                           Decision (Official
   Solicitation                                               Selection
                       Tender            Tender                                End Date)




The process by which the government examines and evaluates proposals is known as ―source
selection‖. This process, covered in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 15 and
Department of Defense (DOD) and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) supplements, includes
informal pre-solicitation activities, the formal solicitation of proposals, and evaluation of
proposals. The source selection process is the responsibility of the Source Selection Authority
(SSA) assigned to the A-76 competition, and, through delegation, to the contracting officer and
the Chairperson of the Source Selection Advisory Council. Although the contracting officer has
hands on responsibility for the process, to include making recommendations that may affect the
solicitation and evaluation process, any decisions impacting competition schedule or content of
the RFP, will be coordinated in advance with the program offices at the requiring activity and at
DLA Headquarters. Key areas in this process include solicitation development; market research
and source development activities; private sector/public reimbursable proposal evaluation; and
comparison of the government, private sector, and public reimbursable offers. These aspects are
discussed in the following sections.

6.3.1 Evaluate Proposals

The process for evaluating proposals usually depends on the scope of the solicitation and its
expected dollar value. Generally, the broader the scope/the higher the dollar value, the more
formal and structured the evaluation process. The evaluation is conducted in accordance with

JULY 20, 2011                                               CHAPTER 6—SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION
                                                 75
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


the SSP, which has been developed in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations
Supplement (DFARS) 215.3. The SSP defines the evaluation factors and criteria. The KO will
arrange for legal counsel to review all such source selection documents to ensure their
compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements.


6.3.1.1         Initial Review

Upon receipt of proposals, the KO will first check the government‘s list of debarred or
suspended contractors to ensure that none of the offerors is on the list. The KO will then review
each proposal to determine whether it complies with the solicitation requirements and has
provided the information necessary for evaluation. Offerors who have not addressed the
requirements may be eliminated from further consideration. If the technical proposals are to be
evaluated by an SSEB, the KO will review these proposals to ensure that no cost data is
included.


6.3.1.2         Evaluation of Cost/Price Proposals

The KO will conduct a preliminary check to ensure the accuracy of calculations in the cost/price
proposals. For proposals from commercial offerors, the KO also will request Defense Contract
Audit Agency assistance, in accordance with policy. In addition, the KO may request other
assistance for evaluation of the Agency Tender. The KO and PEB will evaluate the cost/price
proposals from private sector offerors and the Agency Tender concurrently. The evaluation will
include price analysis and cost realism for all private sector cost proposals, public reimbursable
cost estimates (SCF Lines 1a–6a), and the ACE (SCF Lines 1–6).


6.3.1.3         Evaluation of Technical Proposals

The SSEB will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of each offeror‘s technical proposal
against the factor definitions and applicable standards, all of which are derived from the
requirements as defined in the solicitation and the SSP. The board will evaluate the technical
proposals from private sector offerors and the Agency Tender concurrently. Ratings will be
assigned by evaluators to indicate the extent to which the standards were met. The KO insures
mandatory SSEB training is provided to the SSEB prior to start of technical evaluation of the
offerors.


6.3.1.4         Evaluation of Past Performance

The SSEB will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of each offeror‘s past performance
against the factor definitions and applicable standards, all of which are derived from the
requirements as defined in the solicitation and the SSP. The Agency Tender does not have to
contain past performance information unless the competition involves an existing MEO. If the
Agency Tender includes past performance information, the SSEB will evaluate the past
performance of the private sector offerors and the Agency Tender concurrently. Ratings will be

JULY 20, 2011                                              CHAPTER 6—SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION
                                                 76
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


assigned by the evaluators to indicate the extent to which the standards were met. The KO may
conduct training tailored to the solicitation to prepare the team for the past performance
evaluation.


6.3.1.5           Subcontracting Plans and Proposals for Socioeconomic Programs

The KO is responsible for reviewing subcontracting plans for compliance and for evaluating
proposals for socioeconomic programs (socioeconomic, Javits-Wagner-O‘Day Act entity
participation, and DLA Mentoring Business Agreements Program participation). This evaluation
is limited to commercial offers; the Agency Tender is not required to include a subcontracting
plan or to address socioeconomic program participation.


6.3.1.6         No Private or Public Reimbursable Offers

If DLA performs a standard competition but does not receive any public reimbursable or private
sector offer, or if it is determined that the offers and the prospective SPs are either not
responsible or non-responsive, several actions will be completed.

First, DLA will determine the reasons for the lack of satisfactory private sector or public
reimbursable offers. This determination is accomplished by consulting with private sector
sources to analyze and identify potential problem areas in the solicitation. Once these
consultations are complete, the KO will detail the results in writing and propose a course of
action to the DLA Component Competitive Sourcing Official (CCSO).

After receipt of recommendations from the KO, the CCSO will evaluate the possible courses of
action and provide a recommendation to the Department of Defense (DOD) Competitive
Sourcing Official for approval. Either the solicitation will be revised or the Agency Tender will
be implemented. Any documents developed during this decision process, including the KO‘s
recommendations, should be kept as part of the competition file.


6.3.1.7           Discussions and Revisions

If the evaluations indicate that discussions are necessary or the RFP states discussions will be
conducted, the KO will recommend a competitive range for SSA approval. Upon receiving
approval, the KO will hold discussions with all offerors whose offers fall within that range in
accordance with FAR 15.306. The KO will correspond with the ATO, in writing in a clear,
sufficient, and unambiguous manner, retaining records of all such correspondence as part of the
competition file.

Prior to conducting oral discussions, the normal practice is for the KO to provide written
evaluation notices to all offerors. This practice allows an opportunity for offerors to research the
issues first and make exchanges meaningful.



JULY 20, 2011                                               CHAPTER 6—SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION
                                                 77
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


6.3.2 Selection of the Service Provider

To select the SP, the KO will conduct an LPTA, phased evaluation source selection, or a trade
off source selection (for IT only) in accordance with FAR 15.101-2. The performance decision
will be based on the lowest cost of all offers and tenders determined to be technically acceptable.
After the evaluation is concluded, the KO will perform a final verification to ensure that the
agency and public reimbursable cost estimates are calculated in accordance with Attachment C
of OMB Circular A-76, are based on the standard cost factors in effect on the performance
decision date, and use the version of COMPARE costing software that is in effect on the
performance decision date. The KO will then enter the lowest contract price or public
reimbursable cost on SCF Line 7 and enter any applicable federal income tax adjustment (as a
deduction) on SCF Line 12. The KO will then complete the SCF calculations and sign the form.
The SSA makes the final performance decision by certifying the SCF.

6.3.3 Performance Decision


6.3.3.1         Announcing the Performance Decision

Certification of the SCF by the SSA signifies the end date of the competition. The performance
decision will then be announced on FedBizOpps.gov and locally. A debriefing will also be
offered to all offerors, including the ATO and directly affected employees, in accordance with
FAR 15.503. After resolution of any and all contests to the decision by interested parties, the
KO shall make available the certified SCF, Agency Tender, and public reimbursable tenders
available to the public upon request. (Prior to resolution of contests, these documents can only be
released to legal agents of directly interested parties.) No proprietary information of the private
sector providers of subcontracts included in the agency or public reimbursable tender can be
released to the public. Appendix P provides further details on the release of information. A
sample performance decision schedule can be found in Appendix O.

When the performance decision is in favor of the Agency Tender, the KO will provide a letter of
obligation (LoO) to the ATO for signature. The ATO shall appoint an MEO Responsible Official
(the agency official deemed to be in the best position to oversee and manage the performance of
the day to day in-house organization). This LoO will outline the performance obligations that
the MEO shall meet throughout the performance period and will include: the PWS, with its
attachments and technical exhibits; other applicable portions of the solicitation; the MEO‘s
Quality Control and Phase-in Plans; other applicable portions of the MEO‘s technical proposal;
and, the Agency Cost Estimate.

The letter of obligation will be signed by the procuring contracting officer (KO). The ATO will
indicate receipt/acceptance by signing the LoO and returning the signed LoO to the KO.
Whereas Government contracts are administered by a contracting officer, the LoO will be
administered by a contracting officer to be designated before issuance of the LoO. The ATO
shall issue the signed LoO to the respective MEO activity leader. The A-76 KO will provide the
post award KO and the CGA with a signed copy of the LoO.



JULY 20, 2011                                               CHAPTER 6—SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION
                                                78
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Copies of this letter will also be provided to other interested parties, including the Agency
Tender Official (ATO) and Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD). The LoO will be updated to
address any subsequent modifications and this responsibility resides with the KO.


6.3.3.2          Contesting the Performance Decision

In general, streamlined competitions cannot be contested. In a standard competition, any directly
interested party can contest the following five actions: (1) the solicitation, (2) the cancellation of
the solicitation, (3) the exclusion of a tender or offer from the competition, (4) the performance
decision, and (5) the termination or cancellation of a contract or letter of obligation (provided
that the contest alleges that improprieties involved in the performance decision caused the
termination) (A-76 Circular P. B-20).

OMB Circular A-76 states that all contests are governed by the procedures stated in FAR 33.103,
Protest to the Agency. DLA implementation of FAR 33.103 is provided in DLA Directive 5025-
.30. Although the Director of Procurement for the buying activity typically serves as the official
reviewing alternate agency protests, this is not the case for alternate agency protests concerning
competitive sourcing acquisitions (i.e. contests). For A-76 efforts, DLA appoints a separate
official to ensure a sufficiently independent review. The Agency Contest Authority (ACA) for
alternate agency protests for A-76 competitions is the DLA Deputy General Counsel.

Contests shall be filed with the KO, as stated in the solicitation. The KO will then forward the
contests immediately to the ACA, who will provide copies of all of the contests (redacted if
necessary) to all directly interested parties within 5 calendar days of receipt of the contest, with a
notice that if parties wish to comment on the issues raised in the contest, they must do so in
writing to the ACA within 7 calendar days. The ACA and legal advisor may also obtain
information from other sources, as needed. The ACA and legal advisor will then review the
contest and comments to arrive at a sound decision. The ACA may use facilitation, mediation,
or any other alternative dispute resolution technique to help resolve contest issues. The ACA
will issue a written decision no later than the 30th day after receipt of the contest, explaining why
the contest was sustained, denied, or dismissed. Copies of the decision should be provided by
fax and by certified mail, return receipt requested, to all directly interested parties.

6.3.4 Protests

Protests may be filed with the contracting officer as stated in FAR 33.103. Protests may, in the
alternative, be filed with the alternative agency protest official as stated in FAR 33.103 and this
Guidebook; for A-76 purposes, these protests are considered to be ―contests.‖

With certain limitations, protests may also be filed with the Government Accountability Office
(GAO). Under 31 U.S.C. § 3551(2)(B) and 4 C.F.R. § 21.0(a)(2), the ATO is an interested party
who may file a bid protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) regarding a
competition of an activity or function with more than 65 FTEs. In such a case the ATO may file
a protest if the ATO deems it appropriate, and will file a protest at the request of a majority of
the employees who are performing the function, unless the ATO determines that there is no
reasonable basis for the protest. The ATO's decision not to file a protest when requested by a

JULY 20, 2011                                                CHAPTER 6—SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION
                                                 79
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


majority of the employees will be reported to Congress under 31 U.S.C. § 3552(b)(2). If there is
a protest to GAO by either the ATO or a private sector offeror concerning an activity or function
performed by more than 65 FTEs, a person representing the majority of the employees may
intervene in the protest, although that person may not file a protest on behalf of the employees
(see 31 U.S.C. § 3553(g) and 4 C.F.R. § 21.0(b)(2)). Private sector offerors may also file
protests with the Court of Federal Claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b) and with the GAO.




JULY 20, 2011                                             CHAPTER 6—SOLICITATION AND EVALUATION
                                               80
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


7      POST-COMPETITION

This chapter provides the key steps accomplished after an A-76 competition is awarded to the
selected service provider (i.e., Most Efficient Organization (MEO), Private Sector, or Public
Reimbursable Tender). It is written to encompass all service providers, but those instances when
topics are specifically applicable to one service provider or another will be so annotated. Areas
covered include phasing in the operation from the current organization to the new service
provider; implementing and establishing accountability for the successful service provider
implementation (performance and costs); and determining follow-on competition procedures. As
reflected in the A-76 Life Cycle, Post Competition Accountability is an important step in the
process, equitable to any of the other steps. A successful competition is critical, but a smooth
phase-in and continuing customer-responsive operation are equally crucial.

Responsibility does not end with the competition decisions. In a post-A-76 environment,
responsibility for accomplishing the mission is performed jointly between the selected SP, who
has primary responsibility for day-to-day functions and the Continuing Government Activity
(CGA), whose principal role is oversight.

                                 A-76 Life Cycle
                                                               Follow on
                                                              Competition        Perform Post
                    IGCA-FAIR            Preliminary
                                                                                  Competition
                    Inventory             Planning
                                                                                 Accountability




                        Competition         Public
    Perform Team                        Announcement
      Selection                          (Official Start
                                              Date)                             Award Contract,
                                                                                Fee-For Service
                                                                                 Agreement, or
                                                                                 Issue Letter of
                                                                                   Obligation
  Develop PWS
 And Solicitation




                                                                                     Make
                    Develop Offers    Receive Offers                              Performance
 Issue PWS and                                             Perform Source
                     And Agency        And Agency                               Decision (Official
   Solicitation                                               Selection
                       Tender            Tender                                    End Date)


7.1       TRANSITION TO THE NEW SERVICE PROVIDER

The transition period begins after the announcement of the performance decision, regardless if
the winner is the MEO or a private offeror, and ends with the start of full performance by the
selected SP. A number of activities must take place by both the SP and the RA to enable a
smooth transition from the current organization structure to that planned by the SP. The SP shall
use the phase-in plan submitted in accordance with the solicitation that focuses on making

JULY 20, 2011                                                               CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                   81
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


arrangements to take over the operation. The plan shall address specific criteria included in the
solicitation, but, as a minimum shall cover recruiting, hiring, training, and security limitations.

The RA should plan ahead for the activities for which they are responsible to ensure a successful,
positive, and orderly transition from the government activity under competition to the new SP.
To do this, the RA will establish a transition team early in the process, before the performance
decision is reached. In accordance with the revised Circular, a key responsibility of both the
PWS Team Leader and the PWS Team is to assist in implementing the performance decision.
Therefore, the PWS Team leader and members of the PWS team should be included as part of
the tranisition team. This team provides the high-level, cross-functional leadership required
throughout the transition process.

The transition team should develop and implement a plan that will:

   Minimize loss of critical mission support (to include contingency plans for delayed
    assumption of responsibility)

   Take action to extend/augment military personnel

   Provide a subcontracted capability to support phase-in and mission requirements, if
    necessary.

Between the solicitation closing and the performance decision, the transition team will primarily
focus on:

       Issues associated with personnel actions

       Identifying training requirements and resources

       Reviewing inter-service support agreements (ISSA), standard operating procedures,
        information technology, and security actions.

Deliberate planning or final arrangements cannot be made until the final competition decision is
announced. The activity under competition and the continuing government activity (CGA)
should also consider forming transition teams to handle all new work processes, policies,
procedures, facilities and equipment transfer/disposal, and financial alignment.

During this time, the activity under competition and the CGA will prepare themselves for a
smooth transfer of responsibility by ensuring inventories and records are accurate and repairing
facilities.

Until the resolution of any contest, only legal agents may have access to SP information, such as
types of jobs and concepts of operations. If the performance decision results in an award to the
MEO, the CGA should also have access to the Most Efficient Organization (MEO) documents
(unless the team members have right of first refusal or disclosure issues). The CGA will begin
systematic monitoring of the SP at the start of performance, as described in Section 7.3.



JULY 20, 2011                                                         CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                 82
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Note: MEO Development Team members and advisors as well as PWS Team members and
advisors are eligible for the right of first refusal. The right of first refusal and the FAR 52.207-3
states that the right of first refusal is available only to qualified Government employees who
have been or will be adversely affected or separated. As discussed in 3.9, employees who may be
impacted by the competition are prohibited from serving as part of the source selection
evaluation process.

7.1.1 Implementing the Transition Plan

The RA and the Human Resource Advisor (HRA) and HR task team, and the CGA will focus on:

       Adding details to the transition plan of action and milestones (POA&M)

       Developing an employee transition plan

       Improving or adjusting the communications plan to reduce rumors and maintain morale

       Setting up the HR Transition Center

       Preparing for employee counseling/briefing sessions

       Planning for hiring freezes, stockpiling vacancies, and additional support (subcontract
        labor)

       Planning the appropriate labor relations activities

       Preparing reduction in force (RIF) plans and hiring strategies

       Planning the phase-out of any military positions under competition.

These should be completed prior to the end of Transition. To complete the general POA&Ms,
the RA will:

       Arrange a full inventory of the facilities, equipment, plans, and documents to be
        provided or disposed of

       Schedule required training and certifications

       Establish new cost centers and obtain contingency funds for delayed start

       Develop new protocols and roles

       Establish the CGA (if required)

       Establish assumption-of-responsibility criteria.




JULY 20, 2011                                                         CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                 83
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Throughout the transition period, starting with the first month of the transition, the RA will
provide a monthly progress report to the CSD to provide status and information relative to the
following:

         Status of Affected Personnel: How many are anticipated to be placed elsewhere or
          separated; the total that are either placed or separated during each month of transition?

         Performance: Performance metrics for each month during transition and methods of
          resolving issues that arise during the month.

         Equipment and Facilities: status of maintenance, repairs, turn-ins, etc.

         Training: Status of SP training, to include how many have been trained and the timeline
          for training the remainder. What training, etc.

7.2       POST AWARD CONFERENCE

When the service provider is a contractor, representatives from the contractor‘s phase-in team
and the CGA should attend a post award conference along with:

         The A-76 KO

         The KO who will administer the contract

         Representatives of the contractor to include at least a vice president or president and the
          site manager

When the MEO is the selected SP, the transition team and the CGA will attend the post award
conference along with:

         The A-76 KO

         The KO who will administer the Letter of Obligation

         The MEO representatives, to include the person responsible for implementing the Letter
          of Obligation (LoO)

         The nature of the competition will dictate the need for other representatives, such as
          training or safety officers.

The KO will schedule and chair the conference to be held before the RA has approved that the
phase in process has been successfully completed, and before the SP takes over operations. This
conference typically consists of:

         Review of requirements in the contract/LoO

         A discussion on key points of interest and areas where past disputes have arisen, where
          applicable

JULY 20, 2011                                                           CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                   84
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


         Questions from the SP

         A discussion of terms of the contract/LoO

         A discussion on the role of the CGA

         An overview of any security or safety issues

         A discussion of alternate dispute resolution.

This process ensures that:

         All parties have a shared understanding of the performance and cost reporting
          requirements and are in agreement at the beginning of the performance period;

         Systems, records, and government-provided equipment and resources will be available;

         Customer service will continue in a seamless fashion during the transition.

This conference signals the end of the responsibility for the A-76 contracting officer. If a
contract has been awarded, the KO will pass responsibility for monitoring the SP to the
appropriate activity post-award KO, who may then appoint a contracting officer technical
representative (COTR) to provide day-to-day monitoring of the SP. The COTR may or may not
be a member of the CGA but should work closely with it to determine reporting requirements.

The A-76 KO and the post-award KO should have met early in the transition process to
determine relevant reporting procedures for the performance period. The A-76 KO will hand off
the competition and contract files as well as responsibility. In accordance with the OMB
Circular A-76, the KO will retain the solicitation and any other document from the competition
as part the competition file and will keep the contract file current with FAR Subpart 4.8 for
contracts, LoO‘s and fee-for-service agreements. The post-award KO will provide copies of all
contract/LoO modifications and future actions to the A-76 KO for tracking purposes and
consideration in future competitions. The KO transfers contract, upon award, over to requiring
activity‘s Contacting Office, which will assume all administrative responsibilities to include
awarding option years as well as resoliciting future contracts without public/private competition.

7.3       MONITORING SP PERFORMANCE

The OMB Circular A-76 requires that, regardless of the selected service provider, the agency
will monitor the performance for all performance periods stated in the solicitation, record the
actual cost of performance by performance period and monitor, collect and report performance
information for purposes of past performance evaluation in a follow-on competition.

By strict definition, the relationship between the CGA and the SP is based upon a written
contract or letter of obligation and must be respected accordingly. Conflicts are not unexpected,
but may often be avoided by forming a ―partnership‖ relationship between the CGA and the SP.
Both parties are committed to provide seamless world class service to their customers. This is


JULY 20, 2011                                                          CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                  85
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


best accomplished through a culture of open communications and shared commitment for
success.

SP performance is assessed against the requirements of the contract or LoO, which the SP has
agreed to meet in the solicitation. In the event of a contractor win, an appropriate number of
contract administration positions will be authorized for oversight (The number of contract
specialists is automatically calculated by COMPARE [Line 8, contract administration costs,
which are added to the contractor‘s price]).

Elements of performance monitoring for both standard and streamlined competitions include
implementation of the quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) and completion of option
extension reviews. The SP‘s quality control plan (QCP) shall contain actions for monitoring the
services it provides to meet the requirements of the PWS. The CGA‘s QASP should be updated
to reflect the SP‘s QCP and should contain actions to determine whether the services meet the
performance and technical requirements of the PWS. During the post-award conference, the KO
should provide the performance reporting requirements.

The most advantageous use of the QAE‘s time is for monitoring and verification of the SP‘s
QCP. QAE monitoring can be accomplished by various means, including independent testing
via planned or random sampling, review of the SP‘s QC records and reports against its QCP,
review of customer complaints, performance of surveys and interviews, etc. The QAE
documents the surveillance results, which are provided to the SP. The QAE notifies the KO if
surveillance trends indicate an issue that should be addressed by issuing a contract discrepancy
reports (CDR) that formally notify the SP of a quality problem. When determining the
appropriate level of quality assurance surveillance, the activity under competition must consider
the level of risk acceptable given the relationship of the CA to the organization‘s mission. The
QASP surveillance schedule and frequency is developed by the RA to target QAE efforts on
those areas that have a high risk of affecting effective mission accomplishment. If services are
meeting or exceeding the APLs and there are no other indicators of quality faults, then the QAE
should monitor the SP‘s QC program at a low intensity level.

All issues, requests, correspondence, or complaints from the command and departments (not
under competition), as well as hosts or tenants, will be resolved through a single point of contact
within the CGA. This will allow the CGA to maintain oversight of the SP and will enable the SP
to perform in accordance with the terms of its contract and cost proposal. The RA will alert the
CSD to any critical issues/problems throughout performance and should document lessons
learned for future competitions. In accordance with the QASP, the CGA will begin to monitor
the SP at the beginning of the initial performance period. The purpose of this monitoring is to
ensure compliance with the terms of the PWS, processing payments, negotiating change orders,
providing technical direction, inspecting and evaluating quality control. The QASP will be
implemented by the CGA through the following actions:

•   Scheduling surveillance (monthly inspections and validation of customer complaints)
•   Measuring performance (collecting and analyzing data)
•   Documenting performance (surveillance logs, complaint records, and discrepancy reports)
•   Updating the QASP (collection method modification, reduced/increased inspections)


JULY 20, 2011                                                        CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                86
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Throughout the performance period, the RA will provide a CGA Quarterly Progress Report to
the CSD that reflects the SP's progress against the performance metrics as well as actual costs
(CLIN or Agency Cost Estimate). The report will discuss any deviations from desired
performance or cost and the corrective action that has or will take place. In addition, any
adjustments made during the reporting period will be annotated. Approval authority for changes
to MEO will be established with the CSD and the SSA during the phase-in process. The
individual who has responsibility for implementing the MEO and the LoO, may not possess this
approval authority.

Unsatisfactory performance by the SP or any discrepancy will be documented by the CGA in a
report to the KO within 5 working days of the identification of the deficiency or discrepancy.
Performance will be documented to provide focus for improvement and a legal basis for action.
Informal or anecdotal evidence cannot be used to issue performance awards (if these are part of
the contract/LoO) or to initiate performance deficiency corrective actions. If the SP is providing
unsatisfactory service, the COTR shall notify the post-award KO and the designated KO upon
receipt of the performance report. The KO will then request that the SP take corrective action
and reserves the right to terminate the contract or letter of obligation for lack of corrective action.

In addition, the RA will advise the CSD when the SP‘s performance is unsatisfactory and
identify proposed corrective actions. The CSD is responsible for informing the SSA of problems
in this area and will schedule meetings or video teleconferences as needed to discuss issues. Any
major discrepancies or unsatisfactory service performance occurring post–phase-in should be
elevated to the CSD immediately.

If an SP defaults or is otherwise terminated, the RA will take any necessary actions to prevent
mission stoppage. These actions include authorizing temporary in-house or ISSA performance
and the use of reserves or other contractor support, if established at that time. The RA will
coordinate any anticipated default or termination actions with the Director of Acquisition
Management through the CSD before taking those actions. Final approval of default or
termination will be granted by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Component Competitive
Sourcing Official (CCSO).

Termination for reasons other than failure to perform is discussed in Section 7.7.4.

7.4     POST-AWARD PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW

Please see Appendix T for more information.

7.5     MONITORING A SERVICE PROVIDER (AWARD TERM REVIEW)

Depending on the complexity and size of the work, the RA may consider implementing an
Award Term Review process (IAW the contract/LoO), prior to making an award term to a SP, to
determine whether the SP has met the requirements of the solicitation.

This award term plan is the basis for evaluation of execution of the requirements outlined in the
Activity Under Competition‘s Performance Work Statement (PWS) that was used in the A-76
competition and for presenting an assessment of that performance to the Award Determining
Official (ADO). The specific criteria and procedures used to assess SP performance and to
JULY 20, 2011                                                           CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                  87
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


determine whether an award term period is earned are described herein. The ADO has the
discretion to make unilateral decisions regarding the award term. These include, but are not
limited to the Award Term Evaluation Points (ATEP) earned; business trends and additional
factors; the nature and success of the SP‘s performance and the determination regarding the SP‘s
entitlement to the award term.

The award term will be awarded to the SP through proper documentation. The award term
earned will be determined by the ADO based on the Post Award Audits, if any, and review of the
SP‘s performance against set criteria as defined prior to the initial award of the LoO. The CSD
will provide additional recommendations and guidance should an organization choose to use the
Award Term Review Board (ATRB) process.

7.6       LOO MODIFICATIONS

Standard operating procedures are required to establish the process and approvals necessary to
make any modifications to the MEO or the LoO to include, at a minimum, the level of approval
for individual changes, documentation required to facilitate the decision making process and
complete the audit trail that will be required for the file. The SOP should allow for differences
depending on the complexity and potential impacts of the proposed modification. The SOP
should contain procedures to facilitate the modification process to avoid a long protracted
process. Coordination of the SOP with DLA HQ is necessary to establish the level of
modifications that will be approved at the HQ level.

Modification requests shall provide rationale for the change and shall address, at a minimum,
anticipated impacts to cost, schedule, FTEs/other personnel, and location of mission. The MEO
responsible official is not permitted to approve MEO modification requests.


7.7       UNSATISFACTORY MEO PERFORMANCE

(Please note: the following guidance is specific to unsatisfactory MEO performance.
Unsatisfactory contractor SP performance is handled according to FAR Part 49 (49.402-3 and
49.607).

7.7.1 Notification

The CGA will notify the RA immediately if, at any time after the performance decision, the
CGA learns of performance issues associated with:

         The requirements outlined in the PWS and acceptable performance levels (APL)

         Budgetary allowances proposed in the letter of obligation, and subsequent modifications
          or customer feedback

The RA will then notify the CSD of the issue and recommended course of action. The CSD may
recommend to the CCSO that a review of the operation and organization in question be
conducted. Any review will be coordinated with the RA. Both a single recurring performance
issue and accumulation of various performance issues may constitute a performance problem.
JULY 20, 2011                                                        CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                88
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK




Consistent with FAR Part 49 (49.402-3 and 49.607), if a performance problem is noted, the post-
award KO will notify the MEO of the poor performance through cure notices and show-cause
notices. The cure notice or show-cause notice will specify the problem(s) identified and the
metric/measurement used to identify the issue. The cure notice will establish an acceptable
amount of time for correction of the situation before the next inspection. The post-award KO
will inform the head of the RA of such notices.

7.7.2   Actions and Responsibilities

In response to the cure notice, the MEO ATO shall develop a corrective action plan that
mitigates future risk to the government and provide a POA&M for addressing the issues
identified in the cure notice. This corrective action plan shall be submitted to the post-award KO
and copy shall be sent to the CSD. The post-award KO is responsible for ensuring that
appropriate organizations within the RA are informed.

The post-award KO will review, and recommend (to the RA and the CSD) approval of, the
corrective action plan or return it to the SP for additional information. After the corrective action
implementation time period, the government will review the operation for compliance. If all
aspects of the cure letter were satisfied and the operation or facility is performing acceptably, a
copy of the cure letter will be retained in the post-award KO‘s office. If the MEO fails to show
that all aspects of the cure letter were satisfactorily addressed, the CCSO may, at his or her
discretion, place the MEO in default status. The CCSO, through the post-award KO, will then
notify the ATO of the decision to terminate the contract or letter of obligation.

7.7.3 Default

If the post-award KO determines that the MEO has failed to perform to the extent that a
termination for default is justified, the post-award KO will issue a notice of termination,
consistent with FAR 49.402-3. Prior to the termination, the post award KO will brief the Senior
Procurement Executive and the RA Commander and Director on the issues and reasons behind
the possible termination. Upon terminating an MEO letter of obligation, the CSD will change
the inventory coding to reflect the fact that the activity is no longer performed by an MEO and
will then perform either a streamlined or a standard competition. If the reason for termination of
an MEO is anything besides failure to perform, the DOD CSO is the only authority allowed to
terminate the MEO.

7.7.4 Temporary Remedies

If the post-award KO terminates a MEO letter of obligation for MEO failure to perform, the RA
may use interim contracts, public reimbursable sources, or government personnel on an
emergency basis. The RA cannot allow these temporary remedies to be used for longer than 1
year from the date of termination.




JULY 20, 2011                                                         CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                 89
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


7.7.5 Terminations for Reasons Other Than Failure to Perform

If the RA determines that performance by an MEO is to be terminated for reasons other than
failure to perform, the Department of Defense (DOD) Competitive Sourcing Official (CSO)
(without delegation) will approve the termination, in writing, and provide a copy to OMB before
the termination. Requests for terminations will be forwarded to the CSD and routed through the
CCSO (One possible reason for such a termination is elimination of an agency requirement
through divestiture, privatization, reorganization, or restructuring, or for reasons of national
defense or homeland security).

7.8      BEST PRACTICES AND REQUIRED REPORTS

OMB Circular A-76 stipulates that several requirements will be fulfilled after a competition.
These steps, in addition to finalizing the activity under competition, lay the groundwork for
future competitions. These post-competition requirements enable the success or failure of the
competitive sourcing effort to be effectively tracked, monitored, and improved on.

7.8.1 Best Practices

Once a competition has been completed, the RA will collect lessons learned and best practices
from all competition participants and submit to the CSD for compilation. The CSD will post
best practices and lessons learned from a streamlined or standard competition process on
SHARE A-76! at http://sharea76.fedworx.org/inst/sharea76.nsf/CONTDEFLOOK/HOME-
INDEX and in the DLA A-76 Competitive Sourcing Internet Library & Directory at
http://www.dla.mil/j-3/a-76/A-76Main.html. The CSD will ensure no proprietary data is
released and maintain the accuracy and currency of DLA‘s information, including links, on both
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the DLA A-76 Web sites.

7.9      DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION EXEMPTION PROCESS

OMB Circular A-76 (Attachment B, sec E.5.b) allows for the classification of functions as High
Performing Organization (HPO). To qualify, organizations must:

      1. Have undergone a Business Process Reengineering (BPR) initiative (including an MEO
         organization) within the preceding five years;

      2. Have achieved major performance enhancements under the BPR initiative; and

      3. Anticipate sustaining previous (or achieving new) performance goals through the
         continuation of its existing or completed BPR.

Such an organization shall complete a total organizational assessment in the form of an HPO
Plan that demonstrates enhanced performance measures at least comparable to those measures
that may be achieved through competitive sourcing. All HPOs must be approved by the DOD
CSO.

The DLA has established that only organizations falling into one of the following categories may
apply for HPO status:

JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                90
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


1. An existing MEO resulting from a public-private competition that has successfully
   performed and met its budget for at least eighteen months post-phase in. The DOD CSO will
   approve HPO status before the end of the last performance period on the Standard
   Competition Form (SCF) or Streamlined Competition Form (SLCF). Requiring activity will
   submit application to J-7 for HPO and it will be coordinated at HQ level with J-1, J-4, J-8,
   General Counsel, and Legislative Affairs prior to submission to CSO official.
2. An existing DLA function that has recently undergone a BPR or similar initiative within the
   preceding five years, achieved major productivity and performance enhancements and is able
   to sustain or achieve new performance goals through the continuation of its existing or
   completed BPR plan. The function must contain 50 or less FTE‘s and must demonstrate that
   performance and savings achieved is at least comparable to that achieved through
   competitive sourcing.
If the Requiring Activity (RA) believes there is a good HPO candidate, they will submit a
nomination and application packet to J-75 for coordination with the HPO Board. The Chair of
the HPO Board will determine the deadline for submission each year. At a minimum,
application packets for an MEO organization will be submitted at least one year prior to the end
of the performance period listed on their SLCF or SCF.

The HPO Board shall review applications and submit recommendations to the DLA Component
Competitive Sourcing Official (CCSO) for approval. The HPO Board will be chaired by the
Director, Acquisition Management (J-7) and contain permanent members from DLA Human
Resources (J-1), and DLA Financial Operations (J-8) and permanent advisors from the CSD and
DLA General Counsel‘s Office (DG). Rotating members will be appointed from the applicable
Process Owners/ Parent Organizations of the RA submitting the HPO application packet.

Once a determination has been reached by the HPO Board, the CSD will route the HPO
designation requests to the Department of Defense (DOD) Competitive Sourcing Official (CSO)
for final approval. Existing MEOs designated as HPOs shall receive not more than three years of
additional performance beyond the last performance period included in the SCF/SLCF. Non-
MEO organizations granted HPO status shall be exempt from competitive sourcing activities for
a period of not more than five years.

An organization applying for HPO status will need to address competency and outstanding
achievement in the following areas:

Mission Performance:
    •   Demonstration of comparable performance measures to those that may be achieved
        through competitive sourcing
    •   Organic knowledge, skills or expertise
    •   Efficiency and effectiveness of key functions or processes
    •   Efficiency and effectiveness of the overall organization
    •   General customer satisfaction

Human Resources:
    •   Adequate staff and employees programs
JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                               91
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


    •   Labor management agreements in-place to ensure effective implementation of the BPR
        and/or MEO

Cost:
    •   Demonstration of continued cost savings, documented through the use of COMPARE,
        and overall financial performance for the organization

7.9.1 Application Procedures

An organization will be nominated for HPO status by its RA or process owner/parent
organization. The HPO application packet shall be received no sooner than 18 months after
phase-in for existing MEOs and no later than one year prior to the end of the last performance
period on the SCF/SLCF. The first period of HPO status will begin not earlier than the end of
the last performance period included on the SCF/SLCF. Application packets for non-MEO
organizations may be submitted at any time, but the RA will consult with the Competitive
Sourcing Division prior to submission.

The application packet for all HPO candidates should include:

    1. Detailed HPO plan discussing how the organization meets each of the HPO requirements
       (see Appendix V)
    2. Current organizational chart.
    3. Copy of SCF or SLCF (For existing MEOs)

    4. In coordination with the Contracting Officer, a new Agency Cost Estimate adjusted for
       inflation and materially significant PWS/mission modifications.
    5. Documentation of changes in FTEs and any changes in the amounts among individual
       cost items are also required (This information is used to update COMPARE and generate
       the appropriate form, SCF or SLCF).
    6. Copy of MEO Letter of Obligation and all revisions
    7. Copy of all MEO past performance data
    For Non-MEO Organizations, the packet should also include:

    1. A copy of the approved BPR plan including the ―scope‖ of the BPR organization‘s
       responsibilities, FTEs, etc.; a crosswalk of intended goals and metrics; actual outcomes;
       and justification for any discrepancies
    2. Cost comparison detailing savings realized from BPR activities
    3. Copies of the previous year‘s budget, current year budget and anticipated budget for the
       upcoming year




JULY 20, 2011                                                       CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                               92
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


7.9.2 Evaluation

The CCSO and HPO Board will evaluate the HPO application based on the criteria contained in
Appendix V. Special consideration will be given to those organizations that demonstrate
improvements garnered through implementation of advanced technology programs or system(s).
These programs/systems may include e-Government initiatives, customer relationship
management, supply chain management, enterprise resource management, or knowledge
management systems. The cost-benefit rationale of such improvements will be addressed in the
HPO submission and subsequent performance evaluations.

7.9.3 Notification of Certification

         The CCSO will advise the RA and the KO of the results of the HPO Board review and
          will provide both with a copy of the final evaluation report.
         If approved, the CCSO will then submit the complete HPO Plan and Evaluation report to
          the DOD CSO for final approval.
         If HPO status is approved by the DOD CSO, non-MEO organizations shall sign a Letter
          of Obligation stating their commitment to continuous improvement, the scope of their
          mission and organizational responsibilities, the financial and human resource
          expenditures to accomplish their responsibilities and the time period granted for HPO
          status.
         For existing MEOs, the KO will ensure that any change in status is reflected in the
          current MEO Letter of Obligation and that the new performance period is stated.
          Note: HPO status for existing MEOs shall begin with the completion of the last
          performance period included in the competition.
         DLA will make an announcement on FedBizOps.gov notifying the public of an HPO
          designation.

7.9.4 Monitoring and Performance Evaluations of HPOs


7.9.4.1         Monitoring of HPOs

Once approved, a DLA HPO shall undergo a performance evaluation annually. For an existing
MEO, the CGA will work with the KO to track performance against PWS requirements, APLs,
budget performance, and workload requirements on an annual basis. For a Non-MEO
organization, the RA shall appoint a Quality Assurance Evaluator (QAE) to monitor the HPO
organization.


7.9.4.2     Performance Evaluation

At least three months prior to the end of each year of operation (e.g., annually), the performance
of any organization approved for HPO status will be evaluated and documented by the RA using
the same criteria applied in the original HPO determination. The evaluation shall be completed
before the current year of performance expires and in sufficient time to allow coordination
through DLA and DOD Competitive Sourcing channels. Failure to complete processing of the

JULY 20, 2011                                                        CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                93
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


evaluation and recommendations before the end of the performance period may result in removal
of the organization from the HPO program. The evaluation information will be forwarded to the
CSD with a recommendation about whether or not to continue the organization as an HPO. The
CSD will review the RA‘s documentation and recommendation prior to forwarding to the CCSO
for final determination of continued HPO status for the organization.

If the CGA or QAE determines that overall performance of the organization has dropped below
HPO level, the official may request re-designation to non-HPO status at that time. An HPO that
fails to meet the requirements outlined in its Letter of Obligation shall lose its designation as an
HPO and shall become eligible for a public-private competition. An MEO that loses HPO status
shall be subject to the termination based on failure to perform policies and procedures outlined in
OMB Circular A-76, Attachment B, paragraph E.6. Non-MEO organizations that lose HPO
status shall become eligible for a competitive sourcing competition.




JULY 20, 2011                                                         CHAPTER 7—POST-COMPETITION
                                                94
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


8     COMPETITION COST ISSUES

OMB Circular A-76 competition costs are those costs directly associated with conducting an A-
76 competition. Competition costs are tracked and maintained in the Commercial Activities
Management Information System from the time a competition is announced to the point when a
Most Efficient Organization (MEO) or a private contractor has completed the final performance
period of the competition. Within the Department of Defense (DOD), the service provider‘s (SP)
length of performance is typically for 5 years: a base year and four option years. The Defense
Logistics Agency (DLA) typically uses two performance periods: a 3-year base period and one
2-year option.

A-76 competition costs do not include those costs associated with the overall management of the
competitive sourcing program, such as A-76 policy and guidance, strategic planning and plan of
action and milestones (POA&M) template development, development and maintenance of the
DLA A-76 Competitive Sourcing Internet Library & Directory, DOD liaison, and the DOD
Commercial and Inherently Governmental Activities Inventory.

8.1     BUDGETING FOR AN A-76 COMPETITION

In addition to the cost of salaries and benefits associated with the government personnel who
work on an A-76 competition, travel and training associated with MEO development, source
selection evaluation teams, and Contracting Office support, additional monies are typically
needed to pay for consultants to assist the Requiring Activity‘s Commercial Activities Program
Office in developing Performance Work Statements (PWS), quality assurance surveillance plans,
MEOs, etc. The typical budget planning figure used by DLA for consultant support, travel,
training, and temporary duty (TDY) is $5,000 per announced competition full-time equivalent
(FTE). Current year dollar amounts are available from the Competitive Sourcing Division.

8.2     TRACKING AND MONITORING A-76 COMPETITION COSTS

To the greatest extent possible, competition costs should be directly attributable to a particular
competition on a monthly basis. However, in some cases this may not be possible, such as when
a consultant is used to provide support for PWS or MEO development for several competitions.
In those cases, the costs should be allocated on a per-competition, per-FTE per-month basis.
Monthly costs should be reported during performance metric video teleconference (VTC)
meetings.

For calculation of net savings, gross costs must include direct competition costs that are entered
into the DOD Commercial Activities Management Information System (DCAMIS) and other
true costs not captured by DCAMIS. Other true costs include separation other than severance,
phase-in, and the continuing government activity. Gross savings are the difference in cost
between the pre-competition in-house operation and the post-competition MEO or contractor
over the performance period of the PWS, after adjustment for changes in workload. Net savings
are calculated by subtracting gross costs from gross savings. Competition costs per FTE are
calculated using direct competition costs divided by the number of FTEs announced for a
competition.



JULY 20, 2011                                                  CHAPTER 8—COMPETITION COST ISSUES
                                                95
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


8.3     DOD COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM

OMB Circular A-76 requires that agencies maintain a competitive sourcing tracking database to
monitor and record the progress of all competitions. DLA will use the DOD Commercial
Activities Management Information System (DCAMIS) (located at https://www.dcamis.army.mil)
to fulfill this requirement. DCAMIS is a DOD-wide interactive database-of-record Web
application that can be accessed by the Commercial Activities Program Officer (CAPO) at the RA
level, the CSD, and others on a need-to-know basis. OSD uses DCAMIS to answer all questions
from Congress or DOD regarding DLA's execution of its A-76 commercial activity competitions.
For this reason, the information in DCAMIS shall be kept current at all times.

The CSD is responsible for administering and reviewing the DLA A-76 competition records in
DCAMIS, including assigning competition record numbers. RA CAPOs are responsible for
timely and accurate inputs, updates, and validations in DCAMIS. RAs will forward competition
cost updates to the CSD monthly. The CSD will factor in all Headquarters DLA costs, and then
forward the completed update to the RA CAPOs.

Each competitive sourcing initiative (i.e., standard competition, streamlined competition,
competition waiver) will have a DCAMIS record that tracks execution and savings. Each
initiative record contains an Initiative Administration section (which identifies information
associated with DCAMIS record maintenance) and four separate phases for tracking the
initiative. The major sections are:

Initiative Administration. This section includes administrative information and initiative status
information regarding the specific DCAMIS record
Phase 1—Startup. This phase includes the DCAMIS data required to create and begin an
initiative; the last element in this phase is the public announcement
Phase 2—In-Progress. This phase includes the DCAMIS data related to performing the
initiative; it begins with the establishment of the PWS teams and ends with submission of the
private sector offers
Phase 3—Decision. This phase includes the DCAMIS data documenting decision actions,
beginning with the tentative decision, including resolution of all disputes, and ending with the
announcement of the final decision
Phase 4—Post Decision. This phase includes DCAMIS data that tracks the actual execution of
a final competition decision. It includes phase-in actions, SP information, and post-MEO review
information

8.4     PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT OF COMPETITIONS

In an effort to continuously monitor A-76 competition costs and schedules, and the quality of the
process, the Defense Logistics Agency‘s (DLA) Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD) has
developed performance metrics to be tracked and reported for each competition. Costs and
schedules will be reported for each competition starting with the formal beginning of the
preliminary planning process.


JULY 20, 2011                                                  CHAPTER 8—COMPETITION COST ISSUES
                                                96
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


Under this process, performance measure templates for competition schedules, called
―dashboards,‖ have been developed to capture A-76 competition costs, schedules, and key issues.
The template is included in Appendix W. The Requiring Activity (RA) will report these
performance metrics to the CSD each month via a video teleconference (VTC). The resulting
data provides the basis for information disseminated, as needed, to various levels of management
and is used to make adjustments to the program if necessary.

8.4.1 Competition Cost Plan

Competition participants play a significant role in cost containment by establishing realistic cost
plans and schedules and by being accountable for cost overruns or schedule slippage.

After the appointment of competition officials, the PWS Team Lead and ATO will develop a
competition cost plan, focusing on identifying anticipated costs. This cost plan will be based on
the A-76 BPR resource allocations and cover competition-based resource inputs, including labor
and travel costs from the Performance Work Statement (PWS) team, the Most Efficient
Organization (MEO) team, and the solicitation associated with each competition and will serve
as a baseline of projected costs. The competition cost plan should be broken down into the major
areas of the A-76 competition and by the different groups accountable for executing the plan.
The plan shall be reviewed with the RA Comptroller to ensure alignment with the overall RA A-
76 budget and shall be approved by the CSD.

8.4.2 Performance Metrics Dashboard Process

Beginning with the formal start of the preliminary planning phase of a competition (the AUC,
RA, and the CSD can work together to determine an exact date), program participants must
provide the CSD with:

1. A monthly accounting of the costs associated with each competition

2. An updated schedule of individual milestones, key points, and any changes or actions
   required due to cost overruns or schedule slippage

The CSD will then compile each competition‘s costs and schedule updates into the dashboard
report. Although the cost data in the dashboard is current as of the previous month, the schedule
data on the dashboard should be current as of the time of reporting.

The completed dashboard is then returned to the RA for review and reported to the CSD at the
monthly dashboard VTCs. Dashboards are reviewed and discussed during the VTCs. If
necessary, after the VTC, the dashboard will be finalized to incorporate any additional comments
or clarifications resulting from the meeting.

The detailed performance measurement process and timeline are as follows:

       By the first week of the month, the KO and the team leads provide their
        competition/quadrant updates (current milestones, upcoming milestones, key points, and
        changes/actions required) to the RA staff


JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 8—COMPETITION COST ISSUES
                                                97
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


         By the end of the first week of each month, the RA compiles the KO and team lead
          updates and sends the information to the CSD
         Also by the end of the first week of each month, the RA, the activity under competition,
          the KO, the DORRA, HQ staff, and the Internal Review Office provide cost data from the
          previous month to the CSD
         The CSD compiles and summarizes the cost data from the field and HQ and transfers the
          data to the performance metrics dashboard
         By the second week of the month, the CSD sends out a completed dashboard to all VTC
          attendees
         Usually the third week of each month, a VTC is held for dashboard review and
          identification of issues or action items related to schedule, cost, or quality
         If necessary, after the VTC, the dashboard will be updated to incorporate any additional
          comments or clarifications from the meeting

Updates to a competition‘s cost plan or schedule shall be vetted by the CSD and tracked on the
corresponding month‘s dashboard.


8.4.2.1          Process for Completing the Performance Metrics Dashboard

A sample performance metrics dashboard schedule reporting template can be found in Appendix
W. Detailed steps for completing the performance metrics dashboard are listed below. Note that
most of these steps are completed by the CSD using data supplied by the RA. However, the RA
should ensure that the data entered in the dashboard by the CSD is accurate and valid.

    1. Input the lead point of contact for the activity‘s A-76 competition from the different
       teams in appropriate contact field: PWS team, MEO team, contract team, and HQ
    2. Input the appropriate schedule and cost status indicator (which includes the color and the
       color initial): Green—On schedule/to plan; Yellow—Caution; Red—Action required
    3. Input the name of the activity under competition
    4. Input month/year for the cost data
    5. Input month/day/year for the competition/quadrant updates (this should be more current
       than the cost data)
    6. Input the actual begin and the anticipated end dates of competition in ―Competition Start
       Date‖ and ―Competition Finish Date‖ fields, respectively, using month, day, and year
    7. Input the following data for each quadrant of dashboard:
          –   Current Milestones. Summary of current completed key activities (as of the VTC)
          –   Upcoming Milestones. Key events or activities occurring in the next 4 to 6 weeks

JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 8—COMPETITION COST ISSUES
                                                  98
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


          –   Key Points. High-level overview (no more than three bullets) of schedule, cost, or
              variance trends (e.g., upward or downward costs) and primary influences driving
              them
          –   Changes/Actions Required. Action(s) taken/needed to adjust competition, schedule,
              and/or budget
    8. Cost data is inserted on the right-hand side of the dashboard


8.4.2.2         Process for Completing the Performance Metrics Cost Sheet

A-76 competition costs are those costs directly associated with conducting competitions. Costs
associated with the overall management of the competitive sourcing program for the agency,
such as A-76 policy and guidance, Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act inventory,
etc., are not considered in a specific A-76 competition‘s cost.

A-76 costs must be collected throughout the A-76 competition. By the end of the first week of
each month, Headquarters (HQ) and field cost data from 2 months previous must be submitted to
the CSD. Cost data is collected from:

         HQ staff;
         The activity under competition (e.g., depots);
         The RA (e.g., DDC, DRMS, DES);
         The Contracting Officer (KO);
         The DLA Office of Operations Research and Resource Analysis (DORRA); and
         DLA‘s Internal Review Office.
A sample cost tracking form, with instructions, is provided in Appendix X. The CSD will
compare actual costs with the competition cost plan to determine monthly cost variance in order
to quickly identify problem areas.

8.4.3 Monthly Dashboard VTC Updates

Dashboard VTCs typically occur during the third week each month at regular A-76 VTCs. At
these VTCs, each Commercial Activities Program Manager will provide updates to the
dashboard group. This group will then review and discuss the dashboards and cover several key
points, including:

•   Progress along critical path
•   Completion of milestones
•   Status of upcoming milestones
•   Actual costs to date versus planned
•   Key issues
•   Actions taken, if any, affecting scope, schedule, resources, competition activities, and
    milestone dates


JULY 20, 2011                                                   CHAPTER 8—COMPETITION COST ISSUES
                                                  99
DLA COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (A-76) GUIDEBOOK


•   Issues identified in PWS development or RFP amendments




JULY 20, 2011                                            CHAPTER 8—COMPETITION COST ISSUES
                                             100
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


                                      A APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS

DEFINITIONS

Acceptable Performance Levels (APL): The minimum level of performance the government
will allow and still determine the overall performance to be acceptable.

Activity: A specific task or grouping of tasks that provide a specialized capability, service, or
product based on a government requirement. Depending on the grouping of tasks, an activity
may be an entire function or may be a part of a function. An activity may be inherently
governmental or commercial in nature.

Activity Under Competition (AUC): The specific portion of the organization that is being
competed. As an example, in the distribution arena, the DDC is the Requiring Activity and the
depots are the AUCs. Depending on the grouping of tasks, an activity may be an entire function
or may be a part of a function.

Agency Cost Estimate (ACE): The government‘s cost estimate for the most efficient
organization (MEO) performance of the requirements in the Performance Work Statement
(PWS).

Agency Tender: The in house offer submitted in response to a solicitation for a standard
competition. The Agency Tender includes an MEO, a management plan, a certified agency cost
estimate, the MEO‘s quality control plan, the MEO‘s phase-in plan, and copies of any existing
awarded MEO subcontracts (with the private providers‘ proprietary information redacted).

Agency Tender Official (ATO): An inherently governmental agency official with decision-
making authority who is responsible for the Agency Tender and represents the Agency Tender
during source selection.

Commercial Activity (CA): A recurring service that could be performed by the private sector.
This recurring service is an agency requirement that is funded and controlled through a contract,
fee-for-service agreement, or performance by government personnel. Commercial activities may
be found within, or throughout, organizations that perform inherently governmental activities or
classified work.

COMPARE: The Department of Defense (DOD) designated software tool for completing the
government cost estimate and the standard competition form (SCF)/streamlined competition
form (SLCF).

Competition: A formal evaluation of sources to provide a commercial activity that uses pre-
established rules (e.g., the Federal Acquisition Regulation [FAR], Office of Management and
Budget [OMB] Circular A-76). Competitions between private sector sources are performed in
accordance with the FAR. Competitions between agency, private sector, and public
reimbursable sources are performed in accordance with the FAR and OMB Circular A-76. The
term ―competition,‖ as used in the Circular, includes streamlined and standard competitions
performed in accordance with this guidebook, and FAR-based competitions for agency–


JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                A-1
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


performed activities, contracted services, new requirements, expansions of existing work, and
activities performed under fee-for-service agreement.

Competitive Sourcing Official (CSO): The official responsible for implementation of the OMB
Circular A-76 throughout the Department of Defense and the principal official in charge of the
Department‘s Competitive Sourcing Program. The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Installations and Environment) is appointed this position

Component Competitive Sourcing Official (CCSO): An inherently governmental official
responsible for the implementation of the OMB Circular A-76 within the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA). The Director of DLA is appointed this position.

Continuing Government Activity (CGA): The government organization as an activity that has
completed an A-76 competition that is responsible for the oversight of the service provider (SP)
(MEO or contractor).

Contract Modification: Any written change in terms of a contract

Contracting Officer (KO): An inherently governmental DLA official who participates on the
PWS team and is responsible for the issuance of the solicitation and the source selection
evaluation methodology. The KO awards the contract or issues the letter of obligation or fee-for-
service agreement resulting from a standard or streamlined competition.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)/Contracting Officer’s Technical
Representative (COTR): An individual designated and authorized in writing by the
Contracting Officer (KO) to perform specific technical or administrative functions.

Cure Notice: Issued by KO when default of contract has been determined

Default: Failure to comply

Deviation: Use of any solicitation provision or contract clause with modified or alternate
language that is not authorized

Directly Affected Employees: Civilian employees whose work is being competed in a
streamlined or standard competition.

Firewall: The separation of personnel and organizations involved in competitions to avoid
conflicts of interest. Typically, a firewall involves separating personnel and offices involved in
development of the PWS from personnel and offices involved in development of the MEO.

Full Time Equivalent (FTE): A manpower measure used by the DOD to represent a year‘s
worth of employee effort that equals 1,776 productive work hours, excluding holidays and leave.

Human Resource Advisor (HRA): An inherently governmental DLA official who is a human
resource expert and is responsible for performing human resource-related actions to assist the
ATO in developing the Agency Tender.


JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                A-2
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


Inherently Governmental Activities: An activity that is so intimately related to the public
interest as to mandate performance by government personnel.

Interested Party: For the purposes of challenging the contents of DLA‘s commercial activities
inventory pursuant to the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act, an interested party is (1) a
private sector source that is an actual or prospective offeror for a contract or other form of
agreement to perform the activity and has a direct economic interest in performing the activity
that would be adversely affected by a determination not to procure the performance of the
activity from a private sector source; (2) a representative of any business or professional
association that includes within its membership private sector sources referred to in (1) above;
(3) an officer or employee of an organization within an executive agency that is an actual or
prospective offeror to perform the activity; (4) the head of any labor organization referred to in
section 7103(a)(4) of title 5, United States Code, that includes within its membership officers or
employees of an organization referred to in paragraph (3).

MEO Letter of Obligation: A formal agreement that DLA must implement when a standard or
streamlined competition results in DLA performance (MEO).

MEO Development Team: A group of individuals, comprising technical and functional
experts, formed to assist the ATO in developing the Agency Tender.

Most Efficient Organization (MEO): The MEO refers to the Government's in-house
organization to perform a commercial activity. It may include a mix of Federal employees and
contract support. It is the basis for all Government costs entered on the Cost Comparison Form.
The MEO is the product of the Management Plan and is based upon the performance Work
Statement (PWS). The MEO reflects the proposed organization to perform the work specified in
the PWS.

Performance Measurements: Qualitative measures or indicators of progress toward specified
outcomes or benchmarks.

Performance Work Statement (PWS): A section in the solicitation that identifies the
technical, functional, and performance characteristics of DLA‘s requirements. The PWS is
performance-based and describes DLA‘s needs (the ―what‖), not specific methods for meeting
those needs (the ―how to‖). The PWS identifies essential outcomes to be achieved, specifies
DLA‘s required performance standards, and specifies the location, units, quality, and timeliness
of the work.

PWS Team: A group of individuals, composed of technical and functional experts, formed to
develop the PWS and quality assurance surveillance plan, and to assist the KO in developing the
solicitation.

Phase-in: The process of transferring operations of the incumbent organization to either the
Most Efficient Organization or the private sector offeror; in response to the solicitation.

Phase-in Plan: A prospective provider‘s plan to replace the incumbent provider(s) that is
submitted in response to the solicitation. The phase-in plan is implemented either during its own


JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
                                               A-3
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


performance period or as part of the first performance period of the solicitation and includes
details on minimizing disruption, adverse personnel impacts, and start-up requirements.

Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M): A schedule of important events and key due dates
for specific portions of PWS and MEO materials. It is a tool that enables project teams to
complete their documents on time and allows other key personnel to view expected progress
toward these goals.

Public Announcement: A formal declaration that DLA has made (1) a decision to perform a
standard or streamlined competition or (2) a performance decision in a standard or streamlined
competition. The KO makes these announcements via FedBizOpps.gov.

Public Reimbursable Source: A service provider from a federal agency that could perform a
commercial activity for another federal agency on a fee-for-service or reimbursable basis by
using either civilian employees or federal contracts with the private sector.

Quality Assurance (QA): The functions and associated actions performed by the government
to ensure that contract or letter of obligation requirements are performed in accordance with
(IAW) specified standards and that an appropriate level of SP quality control activities are in
place and operational.

Quality Assurance Evaluator (QAE): An individual responsible for evaluating the
performance of work performed under a PWS.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP): Describes procedures the government will use
to ensure that the actual performance of a successful contractor‘s proposal meets the
requirements of the PWS. The QASP also forms the basis for the Post-MEO Review, which is an
evaluation of performance of commercial activities that are retained in-house.

Quality Control Plan (QCP): A self-inspection plan that is included in all offers and tenders.
The quality control plan describes the internal staffing and procedures that the prospective
provider will use to meet the quality, quantity, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction,
and other service delivery requirements in the PWS.

Request for Proposals (RFP): The solicitation in negotiated acquisitions.

Requiring Activity (RA): The ―owning‖ organization of the function subject to competition.
The RA is ultimately responsible for execution of mission and functions of the AUC. As an
example, in the distribution arena, the DDC is the Requiring Activity and the depots are the
Activities Under Competition.

Service Provider (SP): Organization that performs functions outlined in the PWS.

Show Cause Notice: Issued by KO when default is determined within the contract

Standard Competition Form (SCF): The agency form that documents and certifies all costs
calculated in the standard competition in accordance with OMB Circular A-76 using COMPARE
software.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                A-4
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


Streamlined Competition Form (SLCF): The agency form that documents and certifies all
costs calculated in the streamlined competition in accordance with OMB Circular A-76 using
COMPARE software.

Working Integrated Product Team: Team of Management personnel who work together to
define initiatives, make decisions, and advise the Executive Steering Group.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                        APPENDIX
                                             A-5
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


ACRONYMS

ACE                  Agency Cost Estimate
ADO                 Award Determining Official
ADUSD-SCI           Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Supply Chain Integration)
AFB                 Air Force Base
AFGE                American Federation of Government Employees
AP                  Acquisition Plan
APL                  Acceptable Performance Level
ATEP                Award Term Evaluation Points
ATRB                 Award Term Review Board
ATO                  Agency Tender Official
BAS                 Business and Acquisition Strategies
BASOPS              Base Operations
BCR                 Baseline Costing Report
BOSS                Base Operating Supply System
BPR                 Business Process Reengineering
BSM                 Business Systems Modernization
BVO                 Buyer Value Option
CAM                 Customer Account Manager
CA PM               Commercial Activities Program Manager
CAPO                Commercial Activities Program Office
CAPR                Competition Announcement Press Release
CCSO                 Componenet Competitive Sourcing Official
CDR                 Contract Discrepancy Report
CFR                 Code of Federal Regulations
CINC HQ             Commander in Chief Headquarters
CLIN                Contract Line Item Number

JULY 20, 2011                                                                       APPENDIX
                                              A-6
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


CS                  Contract Specialist
CSD                 Competitive Sourcing Division
CSR                 Customer Service Representative
DAASC               Defense Automated Addressing Systems Center
DAPS                Document Automation and Production Service
DAWIA               Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act
DCAA                Defense Contract Audit Agency
DCAMIS              DOD Commercial Activities Management Information System
DCMA                Defense Contract Management Agency
DDC                 Defense Distribution Center
DDTP                Deaf and Disabled Communication Program
DESC                Defense Energy Support Center
DFARS               Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement
DG                  DLA General Counsel
DHRC                DLA Human Resources Center
DISO-C              DLA Information Support Office Columbus
DL                  DLA Legislative Affairs
DLA                 Defense Logistics Agency
DLA-C                DLA Central
DLA-E               DLA Europe
DLA-P               DLA Pacific
DLAD                Defense Logistics Acquisition Directive
DLAR                Defense Logistics Acquisition Regulation
DLIS                Defense Logistics Information Service
DNSC                Defense National Stockpile Center
DOD                  Department of Defense
DOD/GC-SOCO          Department of Defense Standards of Conduct Office


JULY 20, 2011                                                                 APPENDIX
                                              A-7
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


DODD                 Department of Defense Directive
DODI                Department of Defense Instruction
DOL                 Department of Labor
DORRA               DLA Office of Operations Research and Resource Analysis
DP                  DLA Public Affairs
DRID                Department of Defense Reform Initiative Directive
DRMO                Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office
DRMS                Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
DSCC               Defense Supply Center Columbus
DSCCP               Defense Supply Center Columbus - Procurement
DSCP                Defense Supply Center Philadelphia
DSCC-DR             A-76 Contracting Office
DSCR               Defense Supply Center Richmond
DSIO                DLA Systems Integration Office
DSS                 Defense Security Service
DTC                 DLA Training Center
DUSD (I&E)          Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment)
DV                  Vice Director
EEOO                Equal Employment Opportunity Office
FAIR                Federal Activities Inventory Reform
FAQ                 Frequently Asked Questions
FAR                 Federal Acquisition Regulations
FIPS                Federal Information Processing Standard
FOIA                Freedom of Information Act
FOUO                For Official Use Only
FSR                 Financial Status Report
FTE                 Full Time Equivalent


JULY 20, 2011                                                                      APPENDIX
                                               A-8
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


FWS                 Federal Wage Schedule
FY                  Fiscal Year
GAO                 Government Accountability Office
GFP                 Government-Furnished Property
GS                  General Schedule
GSA                 U.S. General Services Administration
HPO                 High-Performing Organization
HQ                  Headquarters
HR                  Human Resources
HRA                  Human Resource Advisor
HRO                 Human Resources Office
IAW                 In Accordance With
IGCA                 Inventory of Inherently Governmental and Commercial Activities
IGE                 Independent Government Estimate
IPR                 Integrated Product Review
IR                  Independent Review
IRO                 Independent Review Officer
IRTL                Independent Review Team Lead
ISSA                Interservice Support Agreement
J-1                 DLA Human Resources
J-3/4               DLA Logistics Operations and Readiness
J-6                 DLA Information Operations
J-7                 DLA Acquisitions and Management
J-8                 DLA Financial Operations
J-12                DLA Human Resources Strategy
J-14                DLA Human Resources Policy and Information
J-16                DLA Military Personnel and Administration


JULY 20, 2011                                                                         APPENDIX
                                            A-9
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


J-33                DLA Process Management and Enterprise Policy Directorate
J-308               DLA Internal Review Office
J-65                DLA Information Technology Strategy, Policy and Resources
JWOD                Javits-Wagner-O‘Day Act
KO                  Contracting Officer
MEO                  Most Efficient Organization
MBA                 Mentoring Business Agreement
MOA                 Memorandum of Agreement
MOU                 Memorandum of Understanding
MIS                 Management Information Systems
NAF                 Non-appropriated Funds
NEPA                National Environmental Policy Act
OGE                 Office of Government Ethics
OMB                 Office of Management and Budget
OSD                 Office of the Secretary of Defense
PAO                 Public Affairs Office
PBR                 Program Budget Review
PEB                 Price Evaluation Board
PNM                 Price Negotiation Memorandum (see FAR 15.406)
PPP                 Priority Placement Program
POA&M                Plan of Actions and Milestones
POC                 Point of Contact
PRS                  Performance Requirements Summary
PWS                  Performance Work Statement
QASP                 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan
QDR                 Quality Discrepancy Report
RA                   Requiring Activity


JULY 20, 2011                                                                   APPENDIX
                                             A-10
APPENDIX A—DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS


RFP                  Request for Proposal
RIF                 Reduction in Force
ROFR                Right of First Refusal
SCF                  Standard Competition Form
SDDC                Military Surface Distribution Deployment Command
SDP                 Strategic Distribution Platform
SELRES              Selected Reserves
SF                  Standard Form
SLCF                Streamlined Competition Form
SME                 Subject Matter Expert
SOO                 Statement of Objectives
SOW                 Statement of Work
SP                  Service Provider
SPE                 Senior Procurement Executive
SSA                 Source Selection Authority
SSAC                Source Selection Advisory Council
SSEB                Source Selection Evaluation Board
SSP                 Source Selection Plan
TDY                 Temporary Duty
UIC                 Unit Identification Code
USC                 United States Code
VTC                 Video Teleconference
WBS                 Work Breakdown Structure




JULY 20, 2011                                                          APPENDIX
                                              A-11
APPENDIX B―INVENTORY CODING


                                                        B APPENDIX B―INVENTORY CODING

The following guidance is summarized from the OSD Guide to Inventory Submission.
Referenced enclosures and more detailed information can be found on the following web pages
http://www.dodea.edu/offices/cspo/docs/IGCAGuidanceFY2006.pdf or
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement/fair-index.html. More information can also be
found through contacting DLA‘s Competitive Sourcing Branch (J-75).

Column One. Component—Code ―S‖ will be prefilled for all organizations.

Column Two. State, Territory, or Foreign Country—Enter the alphanumeric code for state, U.S.
territory/possession, or foreign country for the activity as listed in Enclosure 2. These codes
have been developed using Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) codes as reported by
the Department of State. For manpower in the Individuals Account, this field should be left
blank. Please note that locations in the United States are designated by a numeric code, not the
two-letter alpha abbreviations used by the United States Postal Service.

Column Three. Location—Organizations should list only the geographic location or installation
site. Do not include the name of the organization or the state. Both pieces of information are
captured elsewhere on the inventory.

Column Four. UIC Code—Organizations will leave this field blank.

Column Five. Unit/Organization Name—Enter the primary level field activity or major staff
element organization name. For example, a full-time equivalent (FTE) in DDTP should be
entered as ―DDC‖; for a FTE in the Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD), enter ―J-75‖.
Organizations should list only acronyms for the unit/organization name.

Column Six. Labor Authorizations—Enter the total number of civilian FTEs2 and the total
military end strength authorized for the activity for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003. Civilian
authorizations include all civilian U.S. citizens and foreign nationals3 on DOD‘s direct payroll,
as well as foreign nationals hired indirectly through contractual arrangements with overseas host
nations. Do not include civilians paid through non-appropriated funds (NAF). Military
authorizations include all Active Component and Selected Reserve (SELRES)4 military.

Column Seven. Labor Classification—Organizations must justify any use of Individual Account
codes for manpower in their narratives.



2   A full-time equivalent (FTE) work-year is the planned use of 1,776 productive hours in a fiscal year (2,080 straight-time
    paid hours less authorized leave and paid time off for training). For example, in the case of full-time employees with
    permanent appointments ―one FTE‖ is normally comparable to ―one employee.‖ Two part-time employees, each working
    1,044 straight-time paid hours in a fiscal year, equal ―one FTE.‖ Only straight-time, not over-time, is included in the
    calculations. See DOD Instruction 4100.33 for more details on how to calculate FTE.
3   Foreign national employees are non-U.S. citizens employed by the U.S. Armed Forces or by a host government to meet the
    needs of the U.S. Armed Forces.
4   The SELRES consists of Active Guard and Reserve personnel, trained individuals (Individual Mobilization Augmentees,
    [IMA]), and members of the SELRES units. Members of the SELRES performing initial active duty for training should be
    counted as members of the SELRES units.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                      APPENDIX
                                                            B-1
APPENDIX B―INVENTORY CODING


Column Eight. Function Code—Enter the function code from Enclosure 4 that best describes the
type of activity performed. For manpower in the Individuals Account, this field should be left
blank.

Column Nine. Criteria Code—Special Coding for FTEs:

Military Branch—Unless otherwise approved by DLA‘s Competitive Sourcing Branch (J-75),
all military positions will be coded F ―Military-Unique Knowledge & Skills.‖
Commercial Activity Positions Affected by Business Systems Modernization (BSM)—Use
Criteria Code P ―Pending Restructuring‖ for all commercial activity positions subject to
competition at the inventory control points through FY 2006 except those positions concerned
with base operations (BASOPS). For all other field activities and major staff elements, if the
commercial activity position has no clear link to BSM, and there are no other restructuring
initiatives going on that affect those positions, use Criteria Code R ―Subject to Review.‖
Positions involved in the Design/Implementation of BSM—Use Criteria Code E ―Civilian
Authority, Direction, & Control‖ and function code Y245 ―Manpower Management Operations.‖
Identify such positions in narratives.
Criteria Code C ―Exemption for Civilian Support Elements in Operating Forces‖—Use
only for those commercial activity positions where there is a hostile force in close proximity or
the mission involves peacekeeping, or where the position has been identified as a ―key‖ position
following the procedures in paragraph E3.2.1.1.3 of DOD Directive 1200.7 or as a ―key‖
position located overseas or that would be transferred overseas during a crisis, which would be
designated as emergency-essential as prescribed by DOD Directive 1404.10.
Criteria Code M ―Exempted by DOD Management Determination‖—Organizations must
obtain approval from the DLA Director prior to assignment of this code. Organizations will
prepare a detailed justification for each position and send it to the DLA Federal Activities
Reform (FAIR) Act Program Manager in their narratives. The Program Manager will prepare an
Executive Summary and send it through DG and J-7 to the Director for approval prior to briefing
corporate board members and preparing the report for the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD). Commercial activity positions that work together with direct and indirect foreign
national positions coded ―L—Exempted by Law, Executive Order, Treaty, or International
Agreement‖ are justified to be coded ―M.‖
Centralized Interns—All intern spaces managed by the DLA Training Center (DTC) will be
coded ―K—Career Progression‖ and will appear only on the DTC Inventory.
Local Interns—Criteria coding will reflect that of the specific position against which they are
assigned.
Strategic Distribution Platform (SDP) sites—The storage and warehousing functions will
be coded ―H—Continuity of Infrastructure Operations.‖
•   Codes ―P,‖ ―W,‖ & ―X‖—When using criteria codes ―P—Pending Restructuring,‖ ―W –
    Nonpackageable, and/or ―X – Alternative to A-76,‖ give a detail justification as to why these
    codes are used.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                            APPENDIX
                                               B-2
APPENDIX B―INVENTORY CODING


Column Ten. Year the Activity First Appeared in the Commercial Activities Inventory—These
data are collected solely for the purpose of responding to FAIR Act requirements. As a result,
entries in this field should be made only for records that contain commercial civilian
authorizations. More specifically, for all manpower that is (1) coded civilian (not including
direct- and indirect-hire foreign nationals); AND, (2) designated as commercial exempt or
commercial reviewable (criteria codes B, C, D, G, H, J, K, L, M, P, R, W, and X), enter all four
digits of the fiscal year the activity first appeared in the Inventory. At a minimum, the following
situations constitute a new activity being added to the Inventory this year and should be coded as
―2004‖: New Mission Requirements, Activities Converted to In-House, and Activities Changed
from Inherently Governmental to Commercial. All entries that first appeared in the FY 1998
Commercial Activities and Inherently Governmental Inventory shall be entered as ―1999‖
(developed in support of the DRID #20, the OMB Raines Inventory, and the original FAIR
Inventory). All entries that first appeared in the FY 1999 Inventory shall be entered as ―2000.‖
All entries that first appeared in the FY 2000 Inventory shall be entered as ―2001.‖ All entries
that first appeared in the FY 2001 Inventory shall be entered as ―2002.‖ And, all entries that first
appeared in the FY 2002 Inventory shall be entered as ―2003.‖ All other records (i.e., those
civilian authorizations that are coded inherently governmental and all military and Individuals
Account authorizations) shall have a ―N/A‖ entered in this field.

Column Eleven. Assigned From—This field applies ONLY to military manpower assigned to
any of the component organizations other than the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps that
are listed in Enclosure 1. To complete this field, enter the code (A, F, M, or N as defined in
Enclosure 1) that corresponds to the military department that provides the resource. If the source
of the authorization is unknown at the time the data is compiled, enter ―UN‖ in this field. For
example, an Army military authorization assigned to DLA would have an ―A‖ listed against that
particular billet in the DLA Inventory. If the military manpower authorizations are assigned to
organizations not listed in Enclosure 1 (e.g., White House assignments and joint activities such
as SDDC, and CINC HQ), the authorizations shall be coded by the appropriate military
department as part of their inventory and should be coded ―N/A‖ in the ―Assigned From‖ field.
All Defense Agencies and field activities that have military manpower assigned to their
organization shall have entries in this field to indicate the parent Service. Prior to submission of
their inventory to OSD, all Defense Agencies and field activities that have military manpower
assigned to their organization shall coordinate with the appropriate military service point of
contacts (POC). With few exceptions, the Services will be the only organizations that will report
―N/A‖ in this field for such military manpower entries.

Cases where this field does not apply include:

•   Civilians assigned to Defense components from one of the military departments
•   Other detailees between military departments
•   Civilians or military detailees provided to other federal agencies
•   Navy Sea-Shore Military Rotation (Criteria Code J) and Navy Military Career Progression
    (Criteria Code K).

All civilian authorizations and cases where this field does apply (as outlined above) shall be
coded as ―N/A.‖


JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                 B-3
APPENDIX B―INVENTORY CODING


Column Twelve. Responsible Official—This will be prefilled.

Column Thirteen. Defense Health Program Manpower—This will be prefilled.

Column Fourteen. Military Technician Manpower—This will be prefilled.

Column Fifteen (DLA Unique Field). Office Symbol—This will be used within DLA for review
and analysis. Enter the office symbol of the FTE down to the tertiary-level field activity or to the
third digit of a major staff element at DLA Headquarters, if applicable, unless otherwise shown
in the following examples: Examples—for an FTE in the CSD, enter ―CSD‖; for an FTE in a
primary-level field activity‘s headquarters, enter the office symbol down to the branch level; for
an FTE in DDTP, enter ―DDTP‖; for an FTE at DRMO Kastel, enter ―DRMO Kastel‖; for an
FTE at DAPS Fairfield Air Force Base (AFB), enter ―DAPS Fairfield AFB.‖

Additional Data Elements—Organizations may add additional Data Elements for local use, but
these elements should not be included in their submission to the DLA FAIR Act Program
Manager.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                B-4
APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                                C APPENDIX C—PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL

                    (Note: This is to be used as a tool for conducting preliminary planning and is NOT mandatory)

                            Guidance for the Defense Logistics Agency Preliminary Planning Checklist

1.      Information Required
        a.    Type: The type of information required is generally any data source that relates to the item listed under the task
              column.
        b.    Source: Choose from the dropdown list where the data in the type cell was found.
        c.    Source Specifics: Identify specific information about the source from which the data was collected (i.e., the name of an
              information system, title of a report, etc.).
        d.    Time Frame: Identify the time frame from which the data was collected (i.e., the report was developed on [date], the
              workload covers the time period from [date] to [date], the IT system was queried on [date]).

2.      Point of Contact
        a.     Name: Insert the name of the POC from which the data was collected.
        b.     Office: Insert the title of the POC and the office with which they are associated.
        c.     Phone: Insert the phone number of the POC.

3.      Actions Taken/Information Required
List the steps that the POC went through to get the information (i.e., who else was involved in gathering the required data).

4.     Status
Check the box that represents the status of the data collection or other processes associated with the task.

5.      Status Explanation (If not complete)
        a.     Specifics: Choose from the list the explanation for the task being incomplete.
        b.     Explanation and Projected Completion Date: List specific reasons for the task being incomplete. Provide an estimated
               completion date for the task.

6.     Comments
Provide other comments as needed.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                   APPENDIX
                                                                   C-1
  APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL



                                                  PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

                                                          Preliminary Planning Phase Step 1: Scoping

                                                                         Actions
                                                                                                         Status Explanation
    Task           Information Required         Point of Contact    Taken/Information     Status                                      Comments
                                                                                                          (If not complete)
                                                                        Required
                  Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                     Specifics: Choose from list...


                  Source: Choose from list...   Office:
Prepare           Source Specifics:
Preliminary                                                                             Complete
Planning Form
and Competition                                                                         Incomplete   Explanation and Projected
Cost Estimate                                                                                        Completion Date:
                  Time Frame:                   Phone:




                  Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                     Specifics: Choose from list...


                  Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                              Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                     Completion Date:
                  Source Specifics:

Review FAIR
Act Inventory                                                                           Complete
and recommend
changes if        Time Frame:                   Phone:                                  Incomplete
necessary




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                           APPENDIX
                                                                              C-2
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                                           Preliminary Planning Phase Step 1: Scoping

                                                                          Actions
                                                                                                          Status Explanation
     Task           Information Required         Point of Contact    Taken/Information     Status                                      Comments
                                                                                                           (If not complete)
                                                                         Required
                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                      Specifics: Choose from list...


Conduct on-site    Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                              Explanation and Projected
focus group                                                                                           Completion Date:
interviews and     Source Specifics:
                                                                                         Complete
collect position
descriptions for
baseline                                                                                 Incomplete
functions
performed          Time Frame:                   Phone:




                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                      Specifics: Choose from list...


Compile all data   Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                              Explanation and Projected
from interviews                                                                                       Completion Date:
                   Source Specifics:                                                     Complete
and validate as
commercial or
inherently                                                                               Incomplete
governmental

                   Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                           APPENDIX
                                                                               C-3
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                                                            Preliminary Planning Phase Step 2: Grouping

                                                                         Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task            Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                      Information Required                    (If not completed)
                    Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                          Specifics: Choose from list...


                    Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                          Completion Date:
Research activity                                                                            Complete
                    Source Specifics:
grouping best
practices within
industry                                                                                     Incomplete



                    Time Frame:                   Phone:



                    Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                          Specifics: Choose from list...
Identify which
grouping            Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
technique                                                                                                 Completion Date:
(functional,        Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
geographical,
etc.) makes the
best business                                                                                Incomplete
sense; Document
IAW 32 CFR
169a.17             Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                                                 C-4
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                                                  Preliminary Planning Phase Step 3: Workload Data and Systems

                                                                           Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task            Information Required            Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                        Information Required                    (If not completed)

Identify the        Type:                           Name:
means by which                                                                                              Specifics: Choose from list...
the workload
data can be
collected:          Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
information                                                                                                 Completion Date:
system              Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
databases, log
books, reports,                                                                                Incomplete
previous studies,
interviews and
technical
estimates,          Time Frame:                     Phone:
statistical
extrapolation

                    Type:                           Name:
                                                                                                            Specifics: Choose from list...


                    Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                            Completion Date:
                    Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
Collect workload
data.
                                                                                               Incomplete



                    Time Frame:                     Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                 APPENDIX
                                                                                   C-5
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                                  Preliminary Planning Phase Step 3: Workload Data and Systems

                                                                           Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task            Information Required            Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                        Information Required                    (If not completed)
                    Type:                           Name:
                                                                                                            Specifics: Choose from list...

Identify the
primary and         Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
secondary tasks                                                                                             Completion Date:
and processes       Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
and their outputs
for the positions                                                                              Incomplete
under
competition
extrapolation
                    Time Frame:                     Phone:



                    Type:                           Name:
                                                                                                            Specifics: Choose from list...


                    Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                            Completion Date:
Identify DLA        Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
and industry
performance
standards                                                                                      Incomplete



                    Time Frame:                     Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                 APPENDIX
                                                                                   C-6
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                                                              Preliminary Planning Phase Step 4: Baseline Costs

                                                                             Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task              Information Required          Point of Contact                              Status                                      Comments
                                                                          Information Required                    (If not completed)
                      Type:                         Name:
Collect historical
                                                                                                              Specifics: Choose from list...
costs for the
positions under
competition:          Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                   Explanation and Projected
Labor costs                                                                                                   Completion Date:
(include              Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
overtime,
premium, and
other pay); and                                                                                  Incomplete
material,
equipment,
facility, and         Time Frame:                   Phone:
utility costs (only
if not GFP)

                      Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                              Specifics: Choose from list...


                      Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                   Explanation and Projected
Enter cost data                                                                                               Completion Date:
into COMPARE          Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
and run
COMPARE;
BCO certifies                                                                                    Incomplete
BCR

                      Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                   APPENDIX
                                                                                     C-7
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                                                   Preliminary Planning Phase Step 5: Type of Competition

                                                                        Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task           Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                     Information Required                    (If not completed)
                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...

Review the
number of FTEs     Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
under                                                                                                    Completion Date:
competition (if    Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
over 50 FTEs,
use standard                                                                                Incomplete
competition; if
fewer than 50
FTEs see below)
                   Time Frame:                   Phone:



                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...


                   Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
If fewer than 50                                                                                         Completion Date:
FTEs, determine    Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
whether to use
streamlined or
standard                                                                                    Incomplete
competition

                   Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                                                C-8
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                                     Preliminary Planning Phase Step 5: Type of Competition

                                                                          Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task             Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                       Information Required                    (If not completed)
                     Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                           Specifics: Choose from list...

Determine
whether the          Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
Agency Tender                                                                                              Completion Date:
or Private Sector    Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
offer is expected
to be greater than                                                                            Incomplete
50 FTEs (if yes,
then use
standard)
                     Time Frame:                   Phone:



                     Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                           Specifics: Choose from list...


                     Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
Determine                                                                                                  Completion Date:
desired              Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
turnaround time
for the                                                                                       Incomplete
competition


                     Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                APPENDIX
                                                                                  C-9
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                                                           Preliminary Planning Phase Step 6: Schedule

                                                                        Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task           Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                     Information Required                    (If not completed)
                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...


                   Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
Determine                                                                                                Completion Date:
required           Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
deliverables
(both internal                                                                              Incomplete
and external)


                   Time Frame:                   Phone:



                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...

Develop plan of
actions and        Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
milestones                                                                                               Completion Date:
(based on          Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
deliverables and
desired                                                                                     Incomplete
turnaround time
for the
competition)
                   Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                                               C-10
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                                           Preliminary Planning Phase Step 6: Schedule

                                                                        Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task           Information Required          Point of Contact                             Status                                     Comments
                                                                     Information Required                    (If not completed)
                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...
                   Source: Choose from list...
                                                                                                         Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                         Completion Date:
                   Source Specifics:
                                                 Office:

Determine                                                                                   Complete
Training           Time Frame:                   Phone:
Requirements                                                                                Incomplete




                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...


                   Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                         Completion Date:
                   Source Specifics:

Develop                                                                                     Complete
acquisition
strategy                                                                                    Incomplete

                   Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                                               C-11
  APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                                          Preliminary Planning Phase Step 6: Schedule

                                                                       Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
    Task           Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                    Information Required                    (If not completed)
                  Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                        Specifics: Choose from list...


                  Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                        Completion Date:
                  Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
Develop source
selection plan
                                                                                           Incomplete



                  Time Frame:                   Phone:



                  Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                        Specifics: Choose from list...


                  Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                        Completion Date:
Develop           Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
communication
plan                                                                                       Incomplete



                  Time Frame:                   Phone:




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                                              C-12
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                              Preliminary Planning Phase Step 7: Competition Officials and Roles and Responsibilities

                                                                        Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task           Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                     Information Required                    (If not completed)
                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...


                   Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
Develop roles                                                                                            Completion Date:
and                Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
responsibilities
for competition
officials and                                                                               Incomplete
team members

                   Time Frame:                   Phone:



                   Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                         Specifics: Choose from list...


                   Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
Identify                                                                                                 Completion Date:
competition        Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
officials (ATO,
KO, PWS Team
lead, HRA,BCO,                                                                              Incomplete
and SSA)

                   Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                                               C-13
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                                Preliminary Planning Phase Step 7: Competition Officials and Roles and Responsibilities

                                                                          Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task             Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                       Information Required                    (If not completed)
                     Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                           Specifics: Choose from list...


                     Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                           Completion Date:
                     Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
Identify potential
team members
                                                                                              Incomplete



                     Time Frame:                   Phone:



                     Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                           Specifics: Choose from list...


                     Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
Brief                                                                                                      Completion Date:
competition          Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
officials on roles
and                                                                                           Incomplete
responsibilities


                     Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                APPENDIX
                                                                                 C-14
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL


                               Preliminary Planning Phase Step 7: Competition Officials and Roles and Responsibilities

                                                                         Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task            Information Required          Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                      Information Required                    (If not completed)
                    Type:                         Name:
                                                                                                          Specifics: Choose from list...


                    Source: Choose from list...   Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                          Completion Date:
Identify need for   Source Specifics:                                                        Complete
consultant
support                                                                                      Incomplete



                    Time Frame:                   Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                                                C-15
   APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL




                                                  Preliminary Planning Phase Step 8: Incumbent Service Providers


                                                                           Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
     Task            Information Required            Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                        Information Required                    (If not completed)
                    Type:                           Name:
                                                                                                            Specifics: Choose from list...


                    Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                            Completion Date:
Identify public     Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
announcement
date                                                                                           Incomplete



                    Time Frame:                     Phone:



                    Type:                           Name:
                                                                                                            Specifics: Choose from list...
Inform any
incumbent           Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
service providers                                                                                           Completion Date:
(agency             Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
personnel or
contractors) of
the date that the                                                                              Incomplete
public
announcement
will be made        Time Frame:                     Phone:




   JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                 APPENDIX
                                                                                  C-16
  APPENDIX C―PRELIMINARY PLANNING ASSESSMENT TOOL



                                                Preliminary Planning Phase Step 8: Incumbent Service Providers


                                                                         Actions Taken/                       Status Explanation
    Task           Information Required            Point of Contact                            Status                                      Comments
                                                                      Information Required                    (If not completed)
                  Type:                           Name:
                                                                                                          Specifics: Choose from list...


                  Source: Choose from list...     Office:                                                 Explanation and Projected
                                                                                                          Completion Date:
                  Source Specifics:                                                          Complete
Make public
announcement
                                                                                             Incomplete



                  Time Frame:                     Phone:




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                                                APPENDIX
                                                                                C-17
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


                                           D APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY
                                                   PLANNING REPORT

                           EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76, Performance of Commercial
Activities, May 2003, requires the completion of nine steps as part of the preliminary planning
before the announcement of a competition. This report details the results of the preliminary
planning for the installation services functions for the Defense Distribution Depot San Joaquin,
California (DDJC) competition.

1. Scope – Installation Services at DDJC encompassing 66.72 in-house positions. There are 14
service contracts.

2. Grouping – Installation services which includes Facility Operations, Maintenance, and
Repair, Infrastructure Operations, Maintenance and Repair, Grounds Maintenance and Repair,
Material Handling Equipment (MHE) and Vehicle Maintenance and Repair, Mail, Passenger and
Refuse Services.

3. Workload Data and Systems – All workload data, work units, quantifiable outputs of
activities or processes were identified and most are obtained from the Equipment Management
and Control System (EMACS) and Integrated Facility System (IFS). There are some workload
data that was identified and manual data collection efforts were established.

4. Baseline Costs – The baseline costs as performed by the current service providers were
identified as $4,248,710 for labor and $3,384,033 for non-labor, which includes service contract
costs.

5. Type of Competition – The installation services for DDJC will be a standard competition,
with its approved time limit waiver, will take 18 months to complete.

6. Scheduled – Public Announcement in Federal Business Opportunities (www.FedBizOps.org)
took place on December 10, 2004 and performance decision is expected June 2006.

7. Roles and Responsibilities – Roles, responsibilities, and availability of participants have been
determined and participants in the process are or will be appointed in writing.

8. Competition Officials – All competition officials are appointed in writing.

9. Incumbent Service Providers – All incumbent service providers were notified on December
10, 2004 that the public announcement would occur on December 10, 2004.

Questions about this report may be directed to:

[Insert PWS Team Lead name and contact information]


JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                               D-1
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


OVERVIEW

    1.1 This Department of Defense competitive sourcing initiative will be conducted as a
        standard competition, in accordance with OMB Circular A-76, May 29, 2003, by the
        Defense Distribution Center (DDC), Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). The commercial
        activities being competed are the installation services located at Defense Distribution
        Depot San Joaquin, California (DDJC). Services excluded from this standard
        competition are Inherently Governmental Responsibilities, Government-Retained
        Responsibilities (i.e., Installation Management, Engineering, Environmental, Material
        Handling Systems), and Implementation of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan
        (QASP) through Performance Assessment.

    1.2 IAW with OMB Circular A-76, May 29, 2003, all requirements of the nine steps of
        preliminary planning are completed. This document provides the information required
        to be released at public announcement.


1      SCOPING AND GROUPING

    2.1 DDJC Installation Services‘ mission is to provide program management and staff
         services for:
         Engineering, operation, maintenance, repair, and construction of real property
            facilities
         Environmental, recycling, custodial, sanitation, and entomology services
         Equipment support including engineering and equipment management, maintenance
            of material handling equipment, vehicles, material handling systems (automated
            and/or mechanized)
         Family housing functions to include programming, budgeting, furnishings, and
            operations
         Quality of Life support functions to include housing management, fitness center,
            child and youth care services, and other standard MWR activities

    2.2 The following are the results of the scoping and grouping during preliminary planning:

    2.2.1 The incumbent service providers that will be impacted by this standard competition are
          approximately 66.72 full time equivalents (FTEs) positions and 14 service contracts
          and other costs. A list of the service contracts can be found at paragraph 2.2.1.2.

    2.2.1.1 The following descriptions for the functions and activities included in scope are from
          the DOD Inventory of Commercial and Inherently Governmental Activities, guide to
          Inventory Submission for Fiscal Year 2003 and supplemented with function
          descriptions from DDJC:

        J999 Organizational & Intermediate Maintenance & Repair of Other Equipment.



JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
                                               D-2
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


        This function includes services to protect, preserve, maintain (including normal parts
        replacement), and repair for MHE/Vehicles/Miscellaneous equipment in accordance with
        manufacturer‘s recommendations/specifications, equipment warranties and sound
        industry practices.

        S200 Installation, Base, or Facility Management. This function includes oversight,
        administration, and control of subordinate activities at the installation to include oversight
        of services provided to tenants. This function involves the management of support
        activities from more than one functional group (to include management of multifunction
        contracts). It also includes emergency planning. This function is typically performed by
        installation, base, and facility commanders and directors and their support staff that
        performs management functions not addressed by other function codes.

        S210 Building Management. This function includes planning, programming, and
        funding for minor construction, maintenance, and repair of government buildings and
        associated grounds and surfaced areas; the administration of rental property; and the
        administration (to include contract administration) of building services. This excludes
        actual repair and maintenance of buildings, grounds and surfaced areas coded Z991-
        Z999. It includes contract management of building management services addressed
        below. It also includes building space management, and moving and handling of office
        furniture and equipment.

        S420 Collection & Disposal of Trash & Other Refuse. This function includes trash
        and other refuse collection, recycling, and disposal services. This excludes the operation
        of incinerators, sanitary fills, or regulated dumps.

        S435 Pest Management. This function includes prevention and control of disease
        vectors and pests that may adversely affect the DOD mission or operation; the health and
        well being of people; or structures, material, or property.

        S726 Heating Plant & Distribution Systems Operation & Maintenance. This
        function includes the provision of steam and hot water and the operation and maintenance
        of the boiler plant, heating systems of all types and capacities and distribution systems at
        the installation.

        S729 Air-Conditioning & Cold Storage Plant & Distribution Systems Operation &
        Maintenance. This function includes the operation and maintenance of air conditioning
        plants, cold storage plants, and heat pumps of all tonnage capacities and distribution
        systems at the installation.

        T110 Retail Supply Operations. This function includes supply operations typically
        performed at the installation to provide supplies and equipment. This includes all basic
        supply functions to include the requisition, receipt, storage, issuance, and accountability
        of materiel to support the functions in scope.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                APPENDIX
                                                 D-3
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


        T824 Motor Vehicle Transportation Services. This function includes management
        and operation of motor vehicles and equipment assigned to the installation for
        administrative movement of personnel, supplies, equipment, and mail. This includes all
        local, intra-post, and inter-post scheduled and unscheduled movement of personnel
        provided by taxi operations.

        Y820 Administrative Management and Correspondence Services. This function
        includes services performed in internal mail and messenger centers, administrative
        support offices and centers. It includes general clerical, secretarial, and administrative
        support duties; coordination, processing, and distribution of paper communications and
        general service messages; translation services; management and processing of forms;
        maintenance and control of administrative services contracts; and other management
        record-keeping duties.

        Z148 Architect-Engineering-Local Projects. This function includes projects at the
        installation. This includes development of architectural and engineering reports, studies,
        and designs; criteria and design review for repair projects and minor construction projects
        that are less than 40-labor hours and $2,500 material estimate.

        Z991 Minor Construction, Maintenance and Repair of Family Housing and
        Structures. This function includes alteration and repair (i.e., minor construction) and
        associated non-professional design services for family housing and structures. This
        function includes exterior and interior painting and glazing; roofing; tiling; flooring;
        screens and blinds repair; and interior plumbing. It includes electrical repair; repair to
        interior heating equipment; and repair to appliances. It includes repair of air conditioning
        and refrigeration systems under a 5-ton capacity and repair of other equipment affixed as
        part of the building and not included in other activities. This function also includes repair
        to fencing, flagpoles, and other miscellaneous structures associated with family housing
        and the rehabilitation of family housing for tenant change and emergency service work.

        Z992 Minor Construction, Maintenance & Repair of Buildings & Structures Other
        than Family Housing. This function includes alteration and repair (i.e., minor
        construction) and associated non-professional design services for buildings and structures
        other than family housing. It includes exterior and interior painting and glazing; roofing;
        tiling; flooring; screens and blinds repair; and interior plumbing. It includes electrical
        repair (to include elevators,); repair of interior heating equipment (including heat sources
        under 750,000 BTU capacity); and repair to appliances (to include installed food service
        and related equipment). It includes repair to air conditioning and refrigeration units under
        a 5-ton capacity; and repair of other equipment affixed as part of the building and not
        included in other activities. It also includes repair to fencing, flagpoles, unattached
        loading ramps, training facilities other than buildings, monuments, and bleachers, and
        other miscellaneous structures.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                D-4
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


        Z993 Maintenance and Repair of Grounds and Surfaced Areas. This function
        includes maintenance, repair, protection and development of land, water, and the
        renewable natural resources; fish and wildlife habitats; and training areas and ranges.
         Grounds (Improved). This includes maintenance and repair of improved grounds,
            including lawns, parade grounds, athletic and recreational areas, other ground areas,
            landscape and windbreak plants, turf grass, ground cover plantings, crushed rock and
            gravel blankets, and accessory drainage systems. These grounds are normally subject
            to annual fixed requirements for grounds maintenance measures consisting of
            seeding, fertilizing, policing, watering, mowing, weed control, pruning, dust control,
            and other essential grounds operations.
         Grounds (Other than Improved). This includes maintenance and repair of small arms
            ranges, safety and security zones, and firebreaks. It also includes grounds such as
            wildlife conservation areas, deserts, swamps, ponds, streams, estuaries for fish and
            waterfowl habitats, and similar areas. These grounds are normally subjected to
            maintenance measures such as open drainage and watersheds to preclude erosion and
            sedimentation; planting vegetation, utilization of structural measures and non
            vegetative surface treatments to control dust, erosion, and surface water; mowing,
            prescribed burning and herbicides to control weeds, brush, vegetative fire hazard and
            poisonous plants; and, cleanup of storm damage.
         Surfaced Areas. This includes all rigid, flexible, and miscellaneous graded and
            stabilized (other than grassed) pavements used for vehicular, and pedestrian traffic,
            and appurtenances. It includes concrete, bituminous, gravel, stabilized, graded, or
            other hard surfaced (e.g., paving block) streets, service drives, alleys, sidewalks, open
            storage areas, parking areas, vehicular and railroad bridges, railroad trestles and
            appurtenances such as shoulders, culverts, storm drainage features, sub-grade drains,
            and footbridges. It also includes traffic control signs and markings, pavement
            numbering and marking, and tie-down anchors. It includes paving, pothole/crack
            repair, inspection, sealing, painting, and other related activities and sweeping and
            snow removal from streets.

        1.2.1.2 The following is a list of contract service providers:

                 Contractor                        Service                    Type of Contract
                                       Provide and service 12            Small Business
        A & A Portables                portable chemical toilets
        American Standards, Inc.       Semi-annual inspection,           Small Business
        (Trane Corp)                   preventive and on-call
                                       remedial maintenance for 6
                                       chillers at Sharpe and
                                       Tracy.
        Capitol Elevator Co.           Quarterly maintenance,            Small Business, Women–
                                       remedial maintenance,             owned
                                       safety inspection, and
                                       certification of 4 elevators
                                       located at Sharpe and
                                       Tracy.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                D-5
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


        Carter Service Group          Preventive and unscheduled    Small Business
                                      maintenance on 523
                                      Evaporative Cooler Systems
                                      (Sharpe and Tracy)
        County of San Joaquin         Dumping fees for San          Small Business
                                      Joaquin County Foothill
                                      landfill at $22.51 per ton
                                      times 250 tons.
        Dan Larson Fire Alarm and     Operation, maintenance,       Small Business
        Electric                      and repair services to fire
                                      alarm systems (Sharpe and
                                      Tracy)
        Fakouri Electrical Eng Inc.   Preventive and on-call        Small Business
                                      remedial maintenance on
                                      the uninterrupted power
                                      supply system at Sharpe
                                      (Building 330)
        Mr. Porta Wash, Inc.          Steam cleaning of char        Small Business, Woman-
                                      broiler grates, kitchen       owned
                                      exhaust ducts and fan
                                      systems on all kitchens and
                                      equipment located at DDJC
                                      Tracy Buildings 16 and 100
        Pro-Tec Fire and Protection   Operation and maintenance     Small Business
        Systems                       and repair services to Fire
                                      Suppression Systems
                                      (Sharpe and Tracy)
        Security Integrators          Preventive and unscheduled    Small Business
                                      maintenance, and inspection
                                      on government owned
                                      security alarm systems
                                      (Tracy and Sharpe)
        Static Power Conversion       Preventive and on-call        Small Business
        Services Inc.                 remedial maintenance of
                                      uninterrupted power supply
                                      system at Tracy
        Stockton Scavenger            Slid waste collection and     Small Business
        Association                   off-site disposal (Sharpe
                                      and Tracy)
        Suburban Propane LP           Maintenance and repair on     Small Business
                                      Emergency Power
                                      Equipment (Gensets and
                                      Generator/Transfer
                                      Switches)
        Western Machinery Electric    Preventive and unscheduled    Small Business
                                      maintenance and repair on

JULY 20, 2011                                                                        APPENDIX
                                              D-6
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


                                          Emergency Power
                                          equipment {(Gensets and
                                          Generator/Transfer
                                          Switches at (Sharpe and
                                          Tracy)}
        GSA                               GSA Lease for Vehicles          Government Lease

        1.2.1.3 The following lists of other service providers:

             Service Provider                              Service
        DFAS                              Financial Support
        Blackstone Consulting, Inc.       Custodial Services
        BCI                               (For Service Provider facilities only)
        Brookfalls Water                  Water Services
        Pacific Gas & Electric            Propane
        Western Area Power                Electricity
        California Bell                   Telephone

    2.3 The following Inherently Governmental functions are not included in the scope of this
        competition:

               Performance assessment and implementation of the Quality Assurance Surveillance
                Plan (QASP)
               Accountable Property Officer functions

         The Government Retained Responsibilities include:

               Installation Service Management. This includes managing, planning and directing
                facilities installation support activities for Defense Distribution Depot San Joaquin,
                California (DDJC). This includes managing the Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
                (MWR) programs and family support; and approving building maintenance and
                repair; and equipment operation and utilization. Managing the energy conservation
                program. Reviewing the contractors‘ efforts to ensure that the contractor is meeting
                requirements and intent of the contract and maintaining surveillance of the
                contractor and accept/reject work performed by the contractor.

               Material Handling Systems (MHS). This includes protecting, preserving,
                maintaining, replacing parts, and repairing all MHS.

               Engineering. This includes managing an effective engineering program that includes
                planning, programming, designing, engineering support and construction; providing
                community planning and programming functions, including housing; conducting
                annual surveys of facilities, streets, playgrounds, utility systems, roofs, drainage and
                other interior and exterior conditions. This also includes developing specifications


JULY 20, 2011                                                                                  APPENDIX
                                                   D-7
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


                for in-house designs and managing A&E contracted designs; providing quality
                assurance surveillance for service contracts; developing requests for proposal,
                preparing cost estimates, analyzing field problems, and developing and maintaining
                infrastructure plans and future facility plans. This also includes providing
                engineering services such as project design for work requests that require a certified
                or registered engineer review and approval. This includes work requests for more
                than 40-labor hours and $2,500 material estimate, repair projects, and minor
                construction projects.

               Environmental. This includes providing an installation environmental protection
                program that complies with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations to
                ensure zero notice of violations. Environmental protection service programs include
                restoration, compliance, pollution prevention, conservation, and community
                relations. This also includes tracking missions and discharges from all equipment
                and users on the installation; and inspecting and tracking areas that could create
                potential problems or releases of hazardous materials.

            Base Supply. This includes providing supplies and materials for distribution mission-
             related functions and the following:
              Retail Supply Operations. This includes installation retail supply services to
                 include local warehouse operations, delivery, customer support, inventory
                 management, and unique industrial activity support.
              Materiel Services. Support for the procurement, inventory control, receipt,
                 storage, quality assurance, issue, turn-in, disposition, property accounting and
                 reporting, and other related functions.

               Motor Pool. This includes managing and operating motor vehicles and equipment
                assigned to the Depot for movement of supplies, equipment, and other products.
                This includes all local, intra-Depot, and inter-Depot scheduled and unscheduled
                movement of transportation operations. This also includes all heavy truck, light
                truck and tow truck operations involved with the movement of equipment, supplies,
                and other products.

               Recycling. This includes coordinating pick-up of various items for recycling‘s direct
                sales program and establishing and overseeing recycling contracts.

               Morale, Welfare, and Recreation/Quality of Life (Non-Appropriated Fund
                Instrumentality). This includes planning, directing, and coordinating the operations
                of NAF programs on the installation.

        These duties represent approximately 203 FTE in the current staffing of DDJC.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                 APPENDIX
                                                   D-8
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


2      WORKLOAD DATA AND SYSTEMS
       An assessment of the types/kinds and availability of workload data, work units,
       quantifiable outputs of activities or processes, agency or industry performance standards
       and other similar data and systems was completed Workload Data Analysis identified
       how the workload data could be collected. Sources used for this information were
       Equipment Management and Control System (EMACS) and Integrated Facility System
       (IFS), log books, reports, interviews, and technical estimates. Historical data was
       collected for a minimum of three years and will be provided with the release of the
       solicitation.

3      BASELINE COSTS
       The following identifies the total baseline costs for the period of August 2003 to July
       2004, as performed by the incumbent service providers. This information provides a
       summary level view for the baseline costs involved within the scope of the competition.
       Detailed cost information is provided in Appendix A.

           SUMMARY OF THE PRELIMINARY PLANNING BASELINE COST
                                            REPORT (BCR)
      COST OF AGENCY INCUMBENT SERVICE PROVIDER PERFORMANCE
      BCR Line 1: Personnel Costs. Agency labor costs for direct and
      indirect labor of the commercial activity being considered for
      public-private competition. Includes labor costs for quality       $4,248,710
      control and for inspection, surveillance and contract
      administration for existing sub-contracts.
      BCR Line 2: Material and supply Costs. Agency cost of
      materials and supplies such as office supplies, including handling $766,944
      and inflation.
      BCR Line 3: Other Specifically Attributable Costs. Other
      agency costs such as the cost of capital, depreciation capital     $2,107,244
      assets, rent, utilities, insurance, and existing subcontracts.
      BCR Line 4: Overhead Costs. Twelve percent of agency
                                                                         $509,845
      personnel costs reflected on BCR Line 1.
      BCR Line 5: Additional Costs. Agency costs not otherwise
                                                                         $0
      accounted for on BCR Lines 1-4.
      BCR Line 6: Total Cost of Agency Incumbent Service
                                                                         $7,632,743
      Provider Performance. The sum of BCR Lines 1-5


4      TYPE OF COMPETITION
       This competition will be a standard competition. The Department of Defense (DOD)
       Competitive Sourcing Official has granted a six-month time limit waiver for this
       competition for a total competition time of 18 months from public announcement to
       making a performance decision.



JULY 20, 2011                                                                            APPENDIX
                                              D-9
APPENDIX D—SAMPLE PRELIMINARY PLANNING REPORT


5     SCHEDULE
    The following is the schedule for this standard competition.

                          Activity                                 Start Date
      Public Announcement (www.FebBizOps.org)                 December 10, 2004
      Solicitation Issued                                     June 2005
      Solicitation Closes                                     October 2005
      Public Announcement of Performance Decision             June 2006

6     COMPETITIVE SOURCING OFFICIALS
    Department of Defense (DOD Competitive Sourcing Official (CSO):
       [insert name]

    DOD Component Competitive Sourcing Official (CCSO) for Defense Logistics Agency:
      [insert name]

7     COMPETITION OFFICIALS
    Contracting Officer – [insert name]
    Agency Tender Official – [insert name]
    PWS Team Leader – [insert name]

8      INCUMBENT SERVICE PROVIDERS
    During the preliminary planning phase, incumbent service providers associated with this
    installation services competition were identified. Current incumbent contractors were
    notified in writing of the DDJC public-private competition prior to the public announcement
    in FedBizOpps. The In-house workforce was notified during a Command All-Hands
    Briefing prior to the public announcement.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                          APPENDIX
                                              D-10
APPENDIX E―INTERVIEW GUIDE


                                               E APPENDIX E―INTERVIEW GUIDE


This interview guide template is merely an example. Questions should be tailored to
accommodate specific audiences.


    Name of Interviewer                                                           Date
    Name of Interviewee
    Interviewee Organization
    Job Classification
    How long have you been in this position?
    Who is your immediate supervisor?
    Do you supervise any employees? If so, how many?
    How is the department/function/activity organized? Subelements?
    Describe the informal organization—―how things really work.‖
    What are the functions in your shop/area/division?
    What are the critical tasks you perform?
    Who are your customers?
    What is your organization‘s mission?
    How do you know if you have succeeded or failed in your mission?
    What performance indicators show this?
    What are the consequences of mission success or failure?
    What are the acceptable quantity levels of performance?
    What does your organization do well? In what areas is there room for improvement?
    What are the inputs to this activity? (e.g., activity starts with a work request)
    Describe the work process and procedures.
    How does the process end? (e.g., completed work request forwarded to manager)
    How much or how many of these activities do you perform each day, week, month, and
    year?
    What government regulations dictate why certain functions are performed? Can any of
    these functions be consolidated or eliminated?
    What aspects of your organization should be changed?
    Are there any unnecessary tasks that could be eliminated?
    With whom do you interface at the facility? With outside vendors?

JULY 20, 2011                                                                            APPENDIX
                                                 E-1
APPENDIX E―INTERVIEW GUIDE


    How do you handle surges in workload? Can you plan for them (e.g., are they seasonal)?
    How do you account for hours worked?
    How do you account for reimbursables?
    How do you determine production schedule?
    How do you find out about changes to requirements?
    How do you respond to those changes?




JULY 20, 2011                                                                        APPENDIX
                                             E-2
APPENDIX F―DOD BASELINE COSTING INFORMATION


                                       F APPENDIX F—DOD BASELINE COSTING
                                                  INFORMATION

For in-depth instructions on Baseline Costing for Public-Private Competitions, refer to the
Department of Defense memorandum from Director-Housing and Competitive Sourcing, Office
of the Undersecretary of Defense, dated August 4, 2005, located at http://www.dla.mil/j-3/a-
76/DODBaselineCosting.pdf.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                        APPENDIX
                                             F-1
APPENDIX G―TIME LIMIT WAIVER TEMPLATE


                                                 G APPENDIX G―TIME LIMIT WAIVER
                                                           TEMPLATE



MEMORANDUM FOR [INSERT NAME], DUSD(I&E)

FROM: [DOD Component Competitive Sourcing Official]

SUBJECT: Request for Standard Competition Time Limit Waiver
         (DOD Component) (DOD Commercial Activities) at (DOD Installation, State)

        In my capacity as the [insert name of DOD Component name] Component Competitive
Sourcing Official, I request your approval, as the DOD Competitive Sourcing Official, of a
standard competition time-limit waiver. This waiver is necessary to provide us with additional
time to conduct a complex standard competition. We anticipate that this competition will be
complex for the following reasons: [insert rationale—If the activity is performed by fewer than
50 authorizations, include additional rationale.].

        The required preliminary planning actions will be completed before the public
announcement date. We have taken steps that should afford us with a sufficient number of
private sector competitors in this public-private competition by ensuring that the packaging of
the activities included in this competition does not provide an advantage to a specific source and
that the grouping is consistent with market and industry structures. We have appropriate
workload data and systems in place and workload data will be available for inclusion in the
solicitation. Preliminary planning baseline costs [have been/will be] calculated in accordance
with ODUSD(AT&L)I&E Memorandum, 5 Aug 05, and will be made available to all
prospective service providers. The competition officials and participants for this competition
[have been/will be] provided with sufficient training to perform their roles and responsibilities.
Your approval of this waiver will allow [specify a period not to exceed 18 months] to complete
the following standard competition.

Competition Schedule (Target Dates)
   Congressional Notification          Public                   Solicitation      Solicitation     Performance
          (if applicable)           Announcement                 Issuance          Closing           Decision




SCOPE OF COMPETITION
                                                     Incumbent Service Providers
   Commercial                               Source:            Source:             Source:
                         Location(s)
    Activities                           DOD Government    Private Sector     Another Agency or
                                           Personnel         Contracts         DOD Component
 Insert the activities     Insert the   Insert the number DOD        Insert the number      Insert the cost of the
that will be competed    geographical   civilian and/or military      of contracts and         fee-for- service
  (e.g., supply, base     location(s)        authorizations           their total dollar   agreement and state if
  operating support,       where the    performing the activities       value ( do not          the agency is


JULY 20, 2011                                                                                          APPENDIX
                                                     G-1
APPENDIX G―TIME LIMIT WAIVER TEMPLATE


   public works,    activities are   (see Circular’s definition   include the number     performance is by
    information      performed            of government               of contract      government personnel
    technology)                             personnel)                employees)            or contract

       Based on the above information, I request approval of a time limit waiver for this
standard competition. My point of contact is (insert name, phone number, email address).


                                                          CCSO Signature




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                    APPENDIX
                                                   G-2
APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)


                                         H APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF
                                           ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)


Note:This POA&M was developed for a competition that began preliminary planning two and a
half years before the scheduled competition announcement. Because of this extensive pre-
planning time, only a minimal duration of time was needed to develop the Performance Work
Statement (PWS). For other competitions, the time period allotted to PWS development tasks will
need to be extended to allow for the preparation of a concise and high quality PWS


 WBS #                               TASK                   Duration     Start      Finish
 1         Competition Duration                             367 days      3/4/05      8/29/06
           Make Public Announcement and Perform Post
 2         Announcement Tasks                               2 days        3/4/05       3/7/05
 2.1       Make Public Announcement via Fed BizOpps         0 days        3/4/05       3/4/05
 2.2       Post Preliminary Planning Information            0 days        3/4/05       3/4/05
 2.3       Create CAMIS files                               2 days        3/4/05       3/7/05
 3         Appoint Competition Teams                        22 days       3/4/05       4/4/05
 3.1       Appoint PWS Team                                 1 day         3/4/05       3/4/05
 3.2       Appoint MEO Team                                 1 day         3/4/05       3/4/05
 3.3       Request SSEB Members                             20 days       3/7/05       4/1/05
 3.4       Appoint SSEB                                     1 day         4/4/05       4/4/05
           Request PPEB Members (PPEB no longer is use so
 3.5       this step will not apply)                        15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 3.6       Appoint PPEB                                     1 day        3/28/05      3/28/05
 3.7       Appoint PEB                                      1 day         3/7/05       3/7/05
 4         Develop and Issue Solicitation                   200 days      3/7/05     12/24/05
 4.1       PWS Development                                  15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.1.1     PWS Data Collection and Analysis                 15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.1.2     Identify Supporting Workload Data                15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.1.3     Identify Performance Standards                   15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.1.4     Identify Additional Supporting Information       15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.1.5     Determine GFP                                    15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.1.6     Identify Common Costs                            5 days       3/21/05      3/25/05
 4.1.7     Develop Independent Government Estimate          5 days       3/21/05      3/25/05
 4.2       RA Develop PWS & QASP                            18 days       3/7/05      3/30/05
 4.2.1     Develop Sections C1 - C6                         10 days      3/14/05      3/25/05
 4.2.2     Develop Historical Information                   7 days       3/14/05      3/22/05
 4.2.3     Develop Workload Projections                     5 days       3/23/05      3/29/05
 4.2.4     Develop Technical Exhibits                       10 days      3/14/05      3/25/05
 4.2.5     Develop Evaluation Criteria                      10 days      3/14/05      3/25/05
 4.2.6     Develop QASP                                     15 days       3/7/05      3/25/05
 4.2.7     Submit PWS to DSCC                               0 days       3/29/05      3/29/05
 4.2.8     Submit GFP Request to the CSO                    1 day        3/30/05      3/30/05
 4.3       Solicitation Planning and Preparation            20 days      3/28/05      4/22/05
 4.3.1     Develop Acquisition Plan                         10 days      3/28/05       4/8/05
 4.3.2     Develop Source Selection Plan                    20 days      3/28/05      4/22/05


JULY 20, 2011                                                                         APPENDIX
                                             H-1
APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)


           Identify Solicitation Provisions Unique to Agency
 4.3.3     Tender                                              3 days      4/11/05    4/13/05
 4.4       Issue Draft RFP                                     46 days     3/18/05    5/20/05
 4.4.1     Develop Draft RFP                                   5 days      4/25/05    4/29/05
 4.4.2     Develop Compliance Matrix (if used)                 2 days       5/2/05     5/3/05
 4.4.3     Request DOL/Wage                                    10 days     3/18/05    3/31/05
 4.4.4     KO/Legal and SSAC Review                            9 days       5/4/05    5/16/05
 4.4.5     RA RFP Review                                       3 days       5/4/05     5/6/05
 4.4.6     KO Resolve Comments                                 3 days      5/17/05    5/19/05
 4.4.7     FEDBIZOPPS Announcement                             1 day       5/20/05    5/20/05
 4.4.8     Issue Draft RFP                                     0 days      5/20/05    5/20/05
 4.5       Site Visit and Functional Review                    15 days     5/31/05    6/20/05
 4.5.1     Site Visit for KO                                   5 days       6/7/05    6/13/05
           Conduct Functional Review of Performance
 4.5.2     Requirements                                        5 days       6/7/05    6/13/05
           Conduct Customer Review of Performance
 4.5.3     Requirements                                        5 days      5/31/05     6/6/05
           Incorporate Comments from Functional, Customer
 4.5.4     Reviews and Draft RFP                               5 days      6/14/05    6/20/05
 4.6       Finalize PWS & QASP                                 28 days      6/3/05    7/13/05
 4.6.1     Update/Finalize Sections C1 - C6                    20 days     6/14/05    7/12/05
 4.6.2     Update/Finalize Historical Information              10 days     6/28/05    7/12/05
 4.6.3     Update Workload Projections                         5 days       7/6/05    7/12/05
 4.6.4     Update/Finalize Technical Exhibits                  15 days     6/21/05    7/12/05
 4.6.5     Update/Finalize QASP                                27 days      6/3/05    7/12/05
 4.6.6     Submit Updated/Finalized PWS to DSCC                1 day       7/13/05    7/13/05
 4.7       Issue Final RFP                                     145 days    5/23/05   12/24/05
 4.7.1     Receive Industry Comments on Draft RFP              30 days     5/23/05     7/5/05
 4.7.2     Prepare Final RFP                                   15 days     7/14/05     8/3/05
 4.7.3     Local Review/Clearance                              10 days      8/4/05    8/17/05
 4.7.4     SSAC Brief & Review                                 10 days     8/19/05     9/1/05
 4.7.5     SSAC Approval to Issue                              1 day        9/2/05     9/2/05
 4.7.6     FedBizOpps Announcement of Final RFP                1 day        8/4/05     8/4/05
 4.7.7     Issue Final RFP                                     1 day        9/9/05     9/9/05
 4.7.8     Notify Workforce of RFP Issue                       1 day        9/9/05     9/9/05
 4.7.9     Pre-Proposal Communications                         130 days    6/14/05   12/24/05
 4.7.9.1   Site Coordination                                   5 days      6/14/05    6/20/05
 4.7.9.2   Equipment Review for Offerors                       0 days     10/16/05   10/16/05
 4.7.9.3   Industry Site Visit                                 1 day      10/17/05   10/17/05
 4.7.9.4   Conduct Pre-Proposal Conference                     1 day      10/18/05   10/18/05
                                                               106
 4.7.9.5   Respond to Changes/Questions                        edays        9/9/05   12/24/05
 5         CGA Development & Training                          538 days     3/4/05    5/18/07
 6         Initial Source Selection                            83 days     1/20/06    5/17/06
 6.1       Solicitation Closes                                 0 days      1/20/06    1/20/06
 6.2       Technical Evaluation                                43 days     1/24/06    3/24/06
 6.2.1     SSEB Site Visit and Indoctrination                  3 days       3/6/06     3/8/06
 6.2.2     Train SSEB                                          1 day       1/24/06    1/24/06
 6.2.3     Conduct Written Proposal Evaluation                 13 days     1/25/06    2/10/06


JULY 20, 2011                                                                         APPENDIX
                                                 H-2
APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)


 6.2.4     Prepare Initial Report for Written Proposals      3 days    2/13/06   2/15/06
           KO/Legal Review of Initial Report for Written
 6.2.5     Proposals                                         3 days    2/16/06   2/21/06
 6.2.6     Develop Sample Task for Oral Presentations        5 days     2/6/06   2/10/06
 6.2.7     Evaluate Oral Presentations                       10 days    3/6/06   3/17/06
 6.2.8     Prepare Initial Evaluation Report/Briefing        2 days    3/20/06   3/21/06
 6.2.9     KO/Legal Review                                   3 days    3/22/06   3/24/06
 6.3       Past Performance Evaluation                       24 days   1/30/06    3/3/06
 6.3.1     Mail Past Performance Questionnaires              2 days    1/30/06   1/31/06
 6.3.2     Compile Past Performance Data                     3 days    2/14/06   2/16/06
           Request Historical Performance (CPH, D&B,
 6.3.3     PPIRS)                                            4 days    1/30/06    2/2/06
           Train PPEB members (PPEB is no longer is use so
 6.3.4     this step will not apply)                         1 day     2/27/06   2/27/06
 6.3.5     Conduct Proposal Evaluation                       2 days    2/28/06    3/1/06
 6.3.6     Prepare Initial Report/Briefing                   1 day      3/2/06    3/2/06
 6.3.7     KO/Legal Review                                   1 day      3/3/06    3/3/06
           Socio and JWOD Evaluation and Subcontracting
 6.4       Plan Review                                       7 days    1/23/06   1/31/06
 6.4.1     Evaluate Socio and JWOD Proposals                 2 days    1/23/06   1/24/06
 6.4.2     Review Sub-Kr Plan                                2 days    1/25/06   1/26/06
 6.4.3     Prepare Initial Report/Briefing                   2 days    1/27/06   1/30/06
 6.4.4     KO/Legal Review                                   1 day     1/31/06   1/31/06
 6.5       Price & Cost Evaluation                           45 days   1/23/06   3/27/06
 6.5.1     DCAA Audit                                        25 days   1/23/06   2/27/06
 6.5.2     MEO Audit                                         25 days   1/23/06   2/27/06
 6.5.3     Build Spreadsheet                                 4 days    2/28/06    3/3/06
 6.5.4     Perform Cost Realism and Price Analysis           9 days     3/6/06   3/16/06
 6.5.5     Prepare Initial Report/Briefing                   7 days    3/17/06   3/27/06
 6.6       Perform Down-Selection                            6 days    3/27/06    4/3/06
           KO Recommends/Notifies SSAC Chairperson of
 6.6.1     Proposed "Self-Deletion"                          1 day     3/27/06   3/27/06
 6.6.2     SSAC Chairperson Concurrence                      4 days    3/28/06   3/31/06
 6.6.3     Ltr(s) to Offeror(s)                              1 day      4/3/06    4/3/06
 6.7       Competitive Range                                 17 days   3/28/06   4/19/06
 6.7.1     KO Develop Recommendation                         2 days    3/28/06   3/29/06
           SSAC Review PEB, SSEB, and Socio Evaluation
 6.7.2     Products                                          3 days     4/3/06    4/5/06
 6.7.3     Develop CR Recommendation                         6 days     4/6/06   4/13/06
 6.7.4     SSAC Briefs SSA                                   1 day     4/14/06   4/14/06
 6.7.5     Notify KO of CR Determination                     1 day     4/17/06   4/17/06
 6.7.6     Notify Krs Excluded                               2 days    4/18/06   4/19/06
 6.8       Pre-Award Debriefs                                20 days   4/20/06   5/17/06
 6.8.1     Determine Timeliness of Request                   3 days    4/20/06   4/24/06
 6.8.2     Prepare Pre-Award Debriefs                        3 days    4/25/06   4/27/06
 6.8.3     KO/Legal Review/Approval                          3 days    4/28/06    5/2/06
 6.8.4     Conduct Pre-Award Debriefs                        11 days    5/3/06   5/17/06
 7         Proposal Revisions                                94 days   1/20/06    6/2/06



JULY 20, 2011                                                                    APPENDIX
                                              H-3
APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)


           Requiring Activity Reviews PWS & Workload and
 7.1       provides Revisions                                30 edays   1/20/06   2/19/06
 7.2       Prepare PBM                                       4 days     4/18/06   4/21/06
 7.3       Prepare Evaluation Notices                        4 days     4/18/06   4/21/06
 7.4       Prepare Amendment                                 10 days    4/18/06    5/1/06
 7.5       KO Review PBM/ENs                                 3 days     4/24/06   4/26/06
 7.6       DSCC-P Review/Approve PBM                         5 days     4/24/06   4/28/06
 7.7       J33 Review/Approve PBM                            5 days      5/1/06    5/5/06
 7.8       Schedule Discussions                              1 day       5/8/06    5/8/06
 7.9       Forward ENs to Offers/Tenders in CR               1 day       5/8/06    5/8/06
 7.10      Conduct Discussions                               1 day      5/11/06   5/11/06
 7.11      Receive Final Revisions                           0 days      6/2/06    6/2/06
 8         Evaluate Final Revisions                          23 days     6/5/06    7/7/06
 8.1       Price & Cost Evaluation                           8 days      6/5/06   6/14/06
 8.1.1     Build Spreadsheet                                 2 days      6/5/06    6/6/06
           Perform Cost Realism and Price Analysis on
 8.1.2     Revisions                                         5 days      6/7/06   6/13/06
 8.1.3     Prepare Final Report/Briefing                     1 day      6/14/06   6/14/06
 8.2       Technical Evaluation                              12 days     6/5/06   6/20/06
 8.2.1     Evaluate Revisions                                8 days      6/5/06   6/14/06
 8.2.2     Prepare Final Report/Briefing                     2 days     6/15/06   6/16/06
 8.2.3     KO/Legal Review                                   2 days     6/19/06   6/20/06
 8.3       Past Performance Evaluation                       6 days      6/5/06   6/12/06
 8.3.1     Evaluate Revisions                                4 days      6/5/06    6/8/06
 8.3.2     Prepare Final Report/Briefing                     1 day       6/9/06    6/9/06
 8.3.3     KO/Legal Review                                   1 day      6/12/06   6/12/06
           Socio and JWOD Evaluation and Subcontracting
 8.4       Plan Review                                       3 days      6/5/06    6/7/06
 8.4.1     Evaluate Revisions                                1 day       6/5/06    6/5/06
 8.4.2     Prepare Final Report                              1 day       6/6/06    6/6/06
 8.4.3     KO/Legal Review                                   1 day       6/7/06    6/7/06
 8.5       Make Performance Decision                         11 days    6/21/06    7/7/06
           KO Compile Evaluation Results and Standard
 8.5.1     Competition Form                                  3 days     6/21/06   6/23/06
 8.5.2     SSAC Review Evaluation Results                    2 days     6/27/06   6/28/06
 8.5.3     Prepare Letters to Affected Parties               2 days     6/29/06   6/30/06
 8.5.4     Prepare SSA Briefing                              2 days      7/5/06    7/6/06
 8.5.5     Present Results to SSA                            1 day       7/7/06    7/7/06
           KO and SSA Sign SCF Certifying Performance
 8.5.6     Decision                                          1 day       7/7/06    7/7/06
 8.5.7     DLA 1693                                          2 days     6/29/06   6/30/06
 9         Public Announcement of Performance Decision       47 days    7/10/06   9/13/06
           Notify Senior DLA Leadership, Congress, Local
 9.1       Level                                             1 day      7/10/06   7/10/06
 9.2       Notify Affected Parties of Performance Decision   1 day      7/12/06   7/12/06
 9.3       Place Announcement in FedBizOpps.gov              0 days      9/1/06    9/1/06




JULY 20, 2011                                                                     APPENDIX
                                                H-4
APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)



           Adjust Baseline Costs to reflect changes to the
           scope and conditions to the competition as stated in
           the final solicitation; revised cost factors; and
 9.4       version updates to COMPARE                               5 days       9/5/06    9/11/06
 9.5       Export Cost Information to CAMIS                         2 days      9/12/06    9/13/06
 10        Conduct Required Personnel Actions                       14 days      9/5/06    9/22/06
 10.1      Mock RIF Letters Issued                                  1 day        9/5/06     9/5/06
 10.2      PPP Briefs (4)                                           2 days       9/6/06     9/7/06
 10.3      Open VISP/VERA Window                                    5 days       9/6/06    9/12/06
 10.4      PPP Counseling and Early Registration                    1 day        9/8/06     9/8/06
 10.5      Open 2nd VISP/VERA Window                                3 days      9/20/06    9/22/06
 11        Conduct Debriefings IAW FAR 15.303                       17 days      9/5/06    9/27/06
           Provide legal agents of directly interested parties
 11.1      with Required Information IAW FAR 15.503(b)              1 day        9/5/06     9/5/06
 11.2      Prepare Debriefings                                      10 days      9/7/06    9/20/06
           Offerors/ATO/Affected Employees Submit Requests
 11.3      for Debriefing                                           1 day        9/6/06     9/6/06
 11.4      Debrief Private Sector Offerors                          5 days      9/21/06    9/27/06
 11.5      Debrief ATO                                              5 days      9/21/06    9/27/06
 11.6      Debrief Affected Employees                               5 days      9/21/06    9/27/06
 12        Announcement/Contracting Office                          60 days     6/26/06    9/20/06
 12.1      Prepare PNM                                              3 days      6/26/06    6/28/06
 12.2      KO Review PNM                                            2 days      6/29/06    6/30/06
 12.3      Contract Clearance Office Review/Approve PNM             2 days       7/5/06     7/6/06
 12.4      Compile Contract/Performance Agreement                   14 days     7/10/06    7/27/06
 12.5      Forward SubKr Plan to DCMA                               10 days      9/5/06    9/18/06
 12.6      KO-P Review/Sign-off                                     2 days      9/19/06    9/20/06
 12.7      DD350 Submssion                                          1 day        9/5/06     9/5/06
 12.8      EEO Clearance Coordination                               1 day        9/6/06     9/6/06
 13        Resolve Contests                                         47 days     9/28/06    12/7/06
 13.1      KO receives protests                                     5 days      9/28/06    10/4/06
           KO requires non-disclosure forms from legal agents
 13.2      of directly interested parties                           5 days      9/28/06    10/4/06
           KO provides copies of redacted protests, SCF, and
 13.3      tenders to legal agents of directly interested parties   1 day       10/5/06    10/5/06
 13.4      KO provides protests to Agency Protest Official          1 day       10/6/06    10/6/06
 13.5      Receive comments                                         1 day      10/16/06   10/16/06
 13.6      Resolve Protests                                         35 days    10/17/06    12/7/06
 14        Award Contract/Cancel Solicitation                       8 days      9/12/06    9/21/06
           Make Agency Tender, SCF available to public upon
 14.1      request                                                  1 day       9/12/06    9/12/06
 14.2      Forward Contract File to ACO                             1 day       9/21/06    9/21/06
 15        Implementing the Performance Decision                    113 days    9/27/06    3/26/07
 15.1      Run RIF                                                  20 days     9/27/06   10/25/06
 15.2      Distribute Official RIF Letters                          1 day      10/27/06   10/27/06
 15.3      Begin Transition Activities                              121 days   10/30/06    2/28/07
 15.4      Provide ROFR List to Contractor (if required)            2 days      11/3/06    11/6/06
 15.5      Post Award Conference                                    1 day       11/1/06    11/1/06


JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                   H-5
APPENDIX H―EXAMPLE OF PLAN OF ACTION & MILESTONES (POA&M)


           Update QASP based on selected Service Provider's
 15.6      QC/CSP                                                45 days    10/31/06    1/19/07
 15.7      Complete Required Inventories                         30 days     2/12/07    3/26/07
 15.8      Provide GF training to SP as required                 1 day      12/15/06   12/30/06
           Conduct Final Assessment of SP's ability to begin
 15.9      full performance                                      14 days      2/8/07    2/28/07
 16        Post Competition Accountability Actions               11 days      3/1/07    3/15/07
 16.1      Full Performance                                      1 day        3/1/07     3/1/07
           Identify and Submit Best Practices and Lessons
 16.2      Learned                                               10 days      3/2/07    3/15/07
 16.3      Provide information to track competition results      10 days      3/2/07    3/15/07
 17        Post-Award Actions                                    64 days      3/2/07    5/31/07
 17.1      Implement QASP                                        1 day        3/2/07     3/2/07
           Maintain currency of contract file or MEO Letter of
 17.2      Obligation                                            1 day        3/2/07     3/2/07
 17.3      Record actual costs by performance period             1 day        3/2/07     3/2/07
 17.4      Monitor, collect and report performance information   1 day        3/2/07     3/2/07
 17.5      Quarterly Meetins for Issues/Lessons Learned          1 day       5/31/07    5/31/07
 18        Develop CGA                                           613 days     3/4/05     9/7/07
 18.1      Handbook                                              120 days    9/12/05    3/17/06
 18.2      Level One                                             120 days    3/20/06     9/7/06
 18.3      Level Two                                             120 days     9/8/06    3/16/07
 18.4      Level Three                                           120 days    3/19/07     9/7/07




JULY 20, 2011                                                                           APPENDIX
                                                 H-6
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


                                               I APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING
                                                         STANDARDS


  Position/Office                  Competencies                          Recommended Training
A-76 Program        Operation and functions under              Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Management              competition                            A-76 executive overview
Personnel           DLA Policy                                 Training in assigned area of expertise
                    Acquisition and source selection roles          (Agency Tender development, writing a
                        and responsibilities                        performance based contract, etc.)
                    DLA roles and responsibilities             Introduction to quality management systems
                    Conflict of interest/ethics issues         Post-competition accountability
                    A-76 process and regulations
                    Statutory and other legal provisions
                    Firewalls
                    Phase-in planning
                    CGA development
                    Quality management systems
                    General understanding of acquisition and
                        contract pricing mechanisms
                    Developing/maintaining the competition
                        file
Agency Tender       The operation and functions under          Agency Tender components
Official (ATO)          competition                            MEO development/strategies
                    Inherently governmental function versus    Team building
                        commercial functions
                                                               Proposal preparation
                    A-76 process and regulations
                                                               Oral presentations
                    Statutory provision
                                                               A-76 executive overview
                    Firewalls
                                                               Introduction to quality management systems
                    MEO process and strategy
                                                               Post-competition accountability
                    Developing the Agency Tender and
                        agency cost estimate
                    General understanding of acquisition and
                        contract pricing mechanisms
                    Conflict of interest/ethics
                    Lessons learned from previous
                        competitions
                    Phase-in plan
                    Quality control plan
                    Local union agreements
                    Quality management systems




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                  I-1
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


  Position/Office                  Competencies                              Recommended Training
Component             Acquisition process                          Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Competitive           A-76 process and regulations                 A-76 executive overview
Sourcing Official
                      Operations and functions under               Roles and responsibilities of the CCSO as
(CCSO)
                          competition                                   defined by OMBC A-76 and the DOD
                      DLA A-76 roles and responsibilities               CSO delegation letter
                      Statutory/legal constraints                  Acquisition executive overview
                      Quality management systems                   Introduction to quality management systems
                                                                   Post-competition accountability
Continuing            Requirements within the RFP                  Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Government            RFP, including Section B, C, H               QA basics (sampling, surveillance,
Activity (CGA)                                                          reporting)
                      General understanding of acquisition and
                           contract pricing mechanisms             Phase-in planning and implementation
                      Introduction to the FAR                      Contracting basics including COR training
                      A-76 process and regulations                 Developing a QA surveillance plan
                      Quality assurance evaluation                 Updating the QASP
                      Phase-in plan requirements                   Validating invoices; computing deducts;
                      Quality control plan requirements                 participating in award term evaluations
                      Service provider versus CGA                  Maintaining the competition/contract file
                           responsibilities                        Alternate dispute resolution/conflict
                      Most Efficient Organization (MEO)                 resolution
                           versus contract service provider        Team building
                      Conflict resolution                          Basic data/statistical analysis
                      Effective communication                      Introduction to quality management
                      Analytical skills                                 systems/advanced quality management
                                                                        systems
                      Quality management systems
                                                                   Systems training (i.e., DSS/MIS)
                      Systems training (i.e., DSS/MIS)
                      Functional training as required
Contract Specialist   Minimum DAWIA Level II certification         Performance Work Statement/QASP
(CS)                  Service contracting                          Competition and source selection
                      Operations and functions under               To ensure the execution of various
                          competition                                   disciplines, the CS should take a
                      Source selection to include oral                  selection of courses that covers all the
                          presentations                                 disciplines discussed herein
                      A-76 process and regulations                 Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                      Conflict of interest/procurement integrity   Introduction to quality management systems




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                                     APPENDIX
                                                      I-2
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


  Position/Office                    Competencies                             Recommended Training
Contracting Officer   DAWIA Level III certification                 Performance Work Statement/QASP
(KO)                  Service contracting                          Responsibilities as defined under OMBC A-
                      The operations and functions under                76 (participation on Performance Work
                          competition                                   Statement team, evaluation of agency
                                                                        offers and tenders, deficiencies in offers
                      Source selection to include oral
                                                                        and tenders, solicitation provisions
                          presentations
                                                                        unique to the Agency Tender, common
                      A-76 process and regulations                      costs, contests, etc.)
                      Conflict of interest/procurement integrity   Competition and source selection
                      Quality management systems                   Procurement integrity
                                                                   Source selection roles and responsibilities
                                                                   To ensure the execution of various
                                                                        disciplines, the KO should take a
                                                                        selection of courses that covers all
                                                                        disciplines discussed herein (as may be
                                                                        appropriate for that KO's knowledge
                                                                        base)
                                                                   Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                                                                   Introduction to quality management systems
Price Evaluation      Solicitation, including General              Contract pricing
Board (PEB)               understanding of acquisition and         Price analysis and cost realism of private
Members                   contract pricing mechanisms                   sector cost proposals, public
                      Price analysis and cost realism                   reimbursable cost estimates, and
                      Operations and functions under                    agency cost estimates
                          competition                              Agency cost estimate development and
                      Quality management systems                        COMPARE training
                                                                   Solicitation provisions unique to the Agency
                                                                        Tender, common costs
                                                                   Introduction to quality management systems
General Counsel /     A-76 process and regulations                 Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
A-76 Legal            The operations and functions under           A-76 executive overview
Advisors                  competition                              Training in assigned area of expertise
                      DLA A-76 roles and responsibilities          Introduction to quality management systems
                      Law in assigned area                         Post-competition accountability
                      A-76 case law
                      Local union agreements
                      GAO decisions affecting A-76
                      Firewall issues
                      Conflict of interest/ethics issues
                      Quality management systems




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                                      APPENDIX
                                                      I-3
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


 Position/Office                  Competencies                          Recommended Training
Human Resource     Operations and functions under             Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Advisor (HRA)          competition                            A-76 executive overview
                   Local union agreements                     Agency Tender development/strategies
                   Employee rights, entitlements, and         Economic price adjustment determinations
                       restrictions under A-76                     for MEO positions
                   Conflicts of interest/ethics
                   A-76 process and regulations
                   Employee welfare
                   Workforce orientation
                   Labor market research
                   Job analysis
                   MEO process/strategy
                   Agency Tender/agency cost estimate
                       development
                   RIF procedures
                   Phase-in planning
J-1                Operations and functions under             Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                      competition                             A-76 executive overview
                   Local union agreements
                   Employee rights under A-76
                   Conflicts of interest/ethics
                   DLA roles and responsibilities
                   A-76 process and regulations
                   Employee welfare
                   Workforce orientation
Responsible/       Operations and functions under             Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Applicable HQs         competition                            Firewalls
Principal Staff    Local union agreements                     Performance Work Statement development
Element
                   Employee rights under A-76                 MEO development
                   Conflicts of interest/ethics               Phase-in planning and implementation
                   Firewalls                                  Source selection process overview
                   DLA roles and responsibilities             Introduction to quality management systems
                   A-76 process and regulations
                   Quality management systems
                   General understanding of acquisition and
                       contract pricing mechanisms
                   Source selection procedures and
                       evaluation criteria
                   Preliminary planning
                   Phase-in planning
                   Quality control plans




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                 I-4
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


  Position/Office                  Competencies                          Recommended Training
J-8                 Operations and functions under             Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                       competition                             Firewalls
                    DLA roles and responsibilities             Performance Work Statement development
                    Conflicts of interest/ethics               MEO development
                    A-76 process and regulations               Phase-in planning and implementation
                    Quality management systems                 Source selection process overview
                    General understanding of acquisition and   Introduction to quality management systems
                       contract pricing mechanisms
Most Efficient      OSD cost manual                            Team building
Organization        Developing an MEO offer strategy           Agency cost estimate
(MEO) - Team
                    Benchmarking                               COMPARE
Members
                    Labor market research                      MEO development/strategies
                    Functions under competition                Job analysis
                    Operations and functions under             Agency Tender development/strategies
                        competition                            Phase-in plan development
                    A-76 process and regulations               Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                    DLA roles and responsibilities             Reengineering or process improvement
                    Conflict of Interest/ethics                     training
                    Phase-in planning                          Development of a quality control plan
                    Quality control plan development           Introduction and advanced quality
                    Lessons learned                                 management systems
                    Proposal development and presentation
                    Oral presentations
                    Negotiated acquisitions/source selection
                    Advanced quality management systems
                    General understanding of acquisition and
                        contract pricing mechanisms
Organization(s)     A-76 process and overview                  Introduction to A-76
Under Competition   Firewalls                                  RFP/Agency Tender/phase-in overview
                    Operations and functions under             Change management
                        competition                            Cross-training program
                    Employee/union rights                      Quality management systems
                    Conflicts of interest/ethics
                    RFP/Agency Tender overview
                    Phase-in plan
                    Quality control plan/quality management
                        systems
                    Timeline (POAM)
                    DLA roles and responsibilities
                    Change management/process
                        improvements
                    Role in Performance Work
                        Statement/Agency Tender
                        development/employee interviews



  JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                  I-5
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


  Position/Office                Competencies                             Recommended Training
Performance Work    The operation and functions under          Preliminary planning elements
Statement Team          competition                            Performance Work Statement components
Lead                Inherently governmental function versus    QASP development
                        commercial functions
                                                               Solicitation development and strategies
                    A-76 process and regulations
                                                               Determination of GFP
                    Roles and responsibilities of the
                                                               Development of baseline costing
                        Performance Work Statement team
                        lead                                   Implementing the performance decision
                    Source selection procedures and            Post-competition accountability
                        evaluation criteria                    Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                    Quality management systems                 A-76 executive overview
                    Lessons learned                            COMPARE Training
                    Quality control
                    CGA development
                    General understanding of acquisition and
                        contract pricing mechanisms
                    Developing/maintaining the competition
                        file
Performance Work    Operation and functions under              Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Statement Team         competition                             Team building
Members             DLA Policy                                 Performance Work Statement development
                    A-76 process and regulations               GFP determinations
                    DLA roles and responsibilities             QASP development
                    Conflict of interest/ethics issues         Data collection and analysis
                    Developing a Performance Work              Workload validation
                       Statement strategy
                                                               Job analysis
                    Phase-in planning
                                                               Outcome analysis
                    Quality control requirements
                                                               Introduction to quality management systems
                    General understanding of acquisition and
                                                               Implementing the performance decision
                       contract pricing mechanisms
                                                               DLA distribution management course (only
                    Lessons learned
                                                                    applicable to DDC)
                    Source selection procedures and
                       evaluation criteria
                    Quality management systems
                    DSS/MIS/FSR training
Preliminary         Operation and functions under              Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Planning “Team”        competition                             Preliminary Planning
                    A-76 process and regulations               Performance Work Statement development
                    DLA roles and responsibilities             QASP development
                    Developing a Performance Work              Data collection and analysis
                       Statement strategy
                                                               Outcome research (includes scoping,
                    Lessons learned                                 market research, customer
                    Baseline cost development                       requirements identification,
                    Data systems training (i.e., DSS, MIS,          performance standards)
                       etc).                                   Performance-based service acquisition
                                                               Development of baseline costing


  JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                   I-6
  APPENDIX I―MINIMUM TRAINING STANDARDS


  Position/Office                Competencies                            Recommended Training
Source Selection    RFP, including Sections B, C, L, and M     Overview briefing of operations under
Advisory Council    Source selection procedures and                 competition
(SSAC)                 evaluation criteria                     Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
                    A-76 process and regulations               Roles and responsibilities of the SSAC
                    Operations and functions under             A-76 executive overview
                       competition                             Source selection training
                    Quality management systems                 Introduction to quality management systems
Source Selection    Acquisition process                        Introduction to OMB Circular A-76
Authority (SSA)     A-76 process and regulations               A-76 executive overview
                    Operations and functions under             Roles and responsibilities of the SSA as
                       competition                                  defined by OMBC A-76
                    The operations under competition           Acquisition executive overview
                    DLA A-76 roles and responsibilities        Introduction to quality management systems
                    Quality management systems
Source Selection    Operations and functions under             Source selection roles and responsibilities
Evaluation Board        competition                            Team building and consensus building
(SSEB)              RFP, including Section B, C, H, L, and M   Source selection training to include
                    Source selection procedures and                 evaluating written proposals and oral
                        evaluation criteria                         presentations
                    General understanding of acquisition and   Solicitation provisions unique to the agency
                        contract pricing mechanisms                 tender and common costs
                    A-76 process and regulations               Introduction to quality management systems
                    Oral presentation process as applicable    DLA distribution management course
                    Quality management systems                      (applicable to DDC)




  JULY 20, 2011                                                                                APPENDIX
                                                   I-7
APPENDIX J―NONDISCLOSURE


                                                J APPENDIX J—NONDISCLOSURE


COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES COMPETITION

NONDISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE)


NAME                                                                     GRADE

JOB TITLE

ORGANIZATION

COMPETITIONS

AFFILIATION TO THE COMPETITION (Circle One): MEO / PWS / Other

1. I acknowledge that my official duties cause me to have access to documents or data
   pertaining to a commercial activities competition. I am aware that unauthorized disclosure of
   source selection or proposal information (including the Agency Tender) could damage the
   integrity of this competition and that the transmission or revelation of such information to
   unauthorized persons could subject me to prosecution under the Procurement Integrity Laws
   or under other applicable laws.

2. I will not divulge, publish, or reveal by word, conduct, or any other means such information
   or knowledge, except as necessary to do so in the performance of my official duties related to
   this competition and in accordance with the laws of the United States, unless specifically
   authorized in writing in each and every case by a duly authorized representative of the United
   States Government.

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

4. If at any time during this competition my participation may might result in a real, apparent,
   possible, or potential conflict of interest, I will immediately report the circumstances to the
   appropriate authorized individual, i.e., contracting officer, local counsel, or source selection
   authority.

SIGNATURE: _________________________________ DATE: ___________________




JULY 20, 2011
                                                J-1
APPENDIX J―NONDISCLOSURE


COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES COMPETITION

NONDISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEE)


NAME

JOB TITLE

COMPANY NAME

COMPETITIONS

DLA SPONSOR
                                  (i.e., DDC, DRMS, J-3/4, etc.)

AFFILIATION TO THE COMPETITION (Circle One): MEO / PWS / Other


1. I acknowledge that my contract responsibilities cause me to have access to documents or data
   pertaining to a commercial activities competition. I am aware that unauthorized disclosure of
   source selection or proposal information (including the Agency tender) could damage the
   integrity of this competition and that the transmission or revelation of such information to
   unauthorized persons could subject me to prosecution under the Procurement Integrity Laws
   or under other applicable laws.

2. I will not divulge, publish, or reveal by word, conduct, or any other means such information
   or knowledge, except as necessary to do so in the performance of my official duties related to
   this competition and in accordance with the laws of the United States, unless specifically
   authorized in writing in each and every case by a duly authorized representative of the United
   States Government.

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

4. If at any time during this competition my participation might result in a real, apparent,
   possible, or potential conflict of interest, I will immediately report the circumstances to the
   appropriate authorized individual, i.e., contracting officer, local counsel, or source selection
   authority.


SIGNATURE: _________________________________ DATE: ___________________
SOURCE SELECTION PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT

  Important! This agreement concerns a matter within the jurisdiction of a United States
  Government agency. This agreement prohibits you from making false, fictitious, or
JULY 20, 2011
                                                   you
  fraudulent statements and/or certifications. If J-2 do so, you may be subject to prosecution
  under 18 U.S.C. 1001.
APPENDIX J―NONDISCLOSURE




COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES COMPETITIONS




NAME
                           (hereinafter referred to as ―you‖ or ―your‖)

ADDRESS




APPOINTED BY


DATE APPOINTED




AGREEMENT

    a. This agreement applies to individuals involved in the above-referenced commercial
       activities competition(s). This agreement applies to your service as a
                                                                                                    .
        (e.g., Source Selection Evaluation Board member)

    b. This agreement contains the rules of conduct for the procurement associated with the
       above referenced commercial activities competition(s). It includes rules of conduct
       regarding conflicts of interest, as well as rules of conduct regarding the safeguarding of
       confidential information.

    c. Your signature on this agreement indicates that you have read this agreement and agree to
       be bound by its terms.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

By signing this agreement, you agree to avoid conflicts of interest. This means that:

JULY 20, 2011
                                                J-3
APPENDIX J―NONDISCLOSURE




        a. You, your spouse, and dependent children do not have any direct or indirect financial
           interest or any other beneficial interest in a potential competing contractor on this
           procurement. Please note any exceptions to this below:




        b. You, your spouse, and dependent children agree not to acquire any direct or indirect
           financial interest or any other beneficial interest in an actual competing contractor on
           this procurement during the source selection process.


        c. You are not related to anyone, by blood or by marriage, who is employed by a
           potential or actual competing contractor on this procurement. Please note any
           exceptions to this below:




        d. You agree not to solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any promise of future
           employment or business opportunity from an officer, employee, representative, agent,
           or consultant of a competing contractor on this procurement during the source
           selection process

        e. You agree not to discuss any future employment or business opportunity from an
           officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant of a competing contractor on
           this procurement during the source selection process

        f. You agree not to ask for, demand, exact, solicit, seek, accept, receive, or agree to
           receive, whether directly or indirectly, any money, gratuity, or other thing of value
           from any officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant of any competing
           contractor on this procurement

        g. You agree not to engage in any personal or professional activity, or enter into any
           financial transaction that involves or appears to involve the direct or indirect use of
           ―inside information‖ to further a private gain for yourselves or others, and

        h. You affirm that, to the best of your knowledge, neither you nor any member of your
           household or immediate family is employed in a position that would be adversely
           affected if this function were contracted out. For purposes of this statement, you
           understand that every position currently devoted, full or part time, to directly
           performing the function under competition is assumed to be adversely affected by a
           decision to contract out.

In the event that you have noted any exceptions in this paragraph, the contracting officer will
advise you whether you may still participate in the source selection process.

JULY 20, 2011
                                                 J-4
APPENDIX J―NONDISCLOSURE




PROTECTING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

By signing this agreement, you agree not to disclose confidential, proprietary, and/or source-
selection-sensitive information to any individual or entity, unless that individual or entity is
authorized by the contracting officer to receive such information. This means that you:

    a. Have read, understood, and agree to abide by the terms of the Federal Acquisition
       Regulation Part 3.104

    b. Will not knowingly disclose, directly or indirectly, proprietary or source-selection-
       sensitive information to any individual or entity, unless that individual or entity is
       authorized by the contracting officer to receive such information

    c. Agree not to discuss evaluation or source selection matters (including proprietary
       proposal information) with any unauthorized individuals, even after the announcement of
       the successful contractor(s), unless authorized by the contracting officer, and

    d. Acknowledge that disclosure of proprietary information may violate the ―Trade Secrets
       Act.‖ If you are found to have violated the Trade Secrets Act, you may be subject to
       criminal penalties.

OTHER RULES OF CONDUCT.

By signing this agreement you agree to abide by the following additional rules of conduct for this
procurement:

    a. You agree not to communicate with offerors or their subcontractors concerning this
       acquisition unless you first obtain the approval of the contracting officer

    b. You recognize that your participation in this source selection may be subject to intense
       scrutiny. As such, you agree to conduct yourself in such a way as to not adversely affect
       the confidence of the public or competing contractors in this source selection process

    c. You agree to avoid any action, whether or not prohibited, that could result in, or could
       create, the appearance of or lack of independence or a lack of impartiality, and certify
       that you

            [ ] have submitted a current OGE 450, Executive Branch Personnel Confidential
            Financial Disclosure Report, or SF 278, Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure
            Report, as required by DODD 5500.7

            [ ] will submit an OGE 450 or SF 278 to your organization‘s designated ethics
            official within 10 work days from the date of your appointment, or



JULY 20, 2011
                                                J-5
APPENDIX J―NONDISCLOSURE


            [ ] have consulted with your organization‘s ethics official and are not required to
            submit an OGE 450 or SF 278.

CONTINUING RESPONSIBILITY.

You understand that your obligations under this agreement are of a continuing nature. If
anything takes place that would cause a change to any statement, or create a violation of any
representation or rule of conduct contained in this agreement, you agree to inform the contracting
officer promptly.

I certify that I have read and understand the above agreement. I further certify that the statements
made herein are true and correct.

I agree to the terms of this agreement.




                      Your Signature                                              Date




                Contracting Officer‘s Signature                                    Date




JULY 20, 2011
                                                  J-6
APPENDIX K―SAMPLE TRAINING PLAN


                                         K APPENDIX K—SAMPLE TRAINING PLAN


1   Goal:

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is committed to supporting the President‘s Management
Agenda and the Office of Management and Budget‘s (OMB) goal to identify those activities
currently performed by the government that are commercial in nature, then allowing those
functions to be competed, between the Government and the commercial sector, to provide the
U.S. Taxpayer with the most value for their dollar. To accomplish this, DLA Enterprise Support
(DES) has reviewed our workforce and identified those areas that are commercial in nature. As
DES begins our process of studies and competitions, we are committed to providing the DES
Workforce with the highest quality training available to assist the workforce in their specific role
within the scope of any DES competitions.

2   Objectives:

   2.1 Ensure the DES Training Plan complies with all OMB, Department of Defense (DOD),
and DLA requirements for required training and competencies.

   2.2 Provide a mechanism for the DES Executive Leadership Team (ELT), site functional
managers, and the DES Commercial Activity Program Office (CAPO) to identify required
competencies, knowledge, skills, and abilities in order to appoint the most qualified personnel to
each key competition position.

  2.3 Ensure that the necessary competencies/courses are identified in order to assist the DES
ELT and Site Management with identifying proper training and sources.

    2.4 Establish and execute a training program that provides high quality training to all
participants, establishing a level playing field for all competition teams, and, subsequently, all
offerors.

    2.5 Maintain fairness and minimize errors in the A-76 process.

3   DES Minimum Training Standards:

The following guidance provides the DES minimum training and knowledge standards necessary
to support in progress and upcoming DES A-76 efforts. Appendix A contains a crosswalk of A-
76 participant/key competition officials to the recommended training requirements from the
DLA Commercial Activities Guidebook. This crosswalk serves as a snapshot of the training
requirements, by A-76 functional area, as mandated by the DLA Competitive Sourcing Division.
Appendix B outlines the minimum competencies and training standards for each of the major
positions/functions that support the DES A-76 program organizational structure. Appendix C
contains a list of recommended courses, organized by competition topic, and recommended
providers. DES management and competition officials should use this list to determine how to
best meet the knowledge, skills, and competency requirements listed in Appendices A and B.


JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                               K-1
APPENDIX K―SAMPLE TRAINING PLAN




    3.1 Just-in-Time Approach: To maximize the knowledge potential and cost effectiveness of
DES A-76 training, a just-in-time approach (prior to the individual being assigned to an A-76
position/function or shortly after the appointment) will be utilized for training key competition
officials and supporting team members, when possible. Additionally, the DES CAPO will
investigate scheduling ―common‖ courses in A-76, like the A-76 Overview course, to ensure that
a base of knowledge exists throughout DES Headquarters and all field activities. Also, CAPO
personnel or the corresponding Competition Team Lead, in collaboration with the employee‘s
supervisor, should ensure that each employee‘s Individual Development Plan is updated to
reflect the A-76 training requirements and completed training.

    3.2 DLA Competitive Sourcing/A-76 Courses: In an effort to prepare those activities
affected by the competitive sourcing initiative, the DLA Logistics Operations Competitive
Sourcing Division (J-75), in collaboration with Booz Allen Hamilton, has developed several
courses: A-76 Overview, Preparing for an A-76 Competition at DLA: Preliminary Planning,
A-76 Executive Overview, Performance Work Statement (PWS) Overview, Agency Tender
Overview, Agency Tender Tools and Techniques, Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)
Overview, Continuing Government Activity (CGA) Overview, and COMPARE Overview
(currently under development). These courses are developed specifically for DLA, with
consideration to Agency and DOD specific requirements, and address many agency-specific
issues that general A-76 courses may not. These courses are coordinated through the DES
CAPO and J-75, and a suggested course list can be found within Appendix C of this document.
J-75 is currently in the process of revising the DLA A-76 Web site to allow DLA employees
interested in training courses to register their interest. These courses will be centrally funded
through J-75 or the CAPO; however, sites must cover their own Travel and Temporary Duty
(TDY) costs. When possible, the courses will be offered where the majority of attendees are
physically located in order to reduce TDY/travel costs.

   3.3 Other Courses: In addition, recommended courses/training identified in the plan, but not
available through DLA can be obtained from the Defense Acquisition University, other
government organizations, or commercial training sources. Suggested government (desired
source) and commercial training sources are as follows:

       Defense Acquisition University: www.dau.mil
       National Defense University: www.ndu.edu
       A-76 Institute (Washington, DC): www.A76institute.com
       BAE Systems (Washington, DC/Huntsville, AL): www.mevatec.com
       Management Concepts (Vienna, VA): www.mgmtconcepts.com
       The Performance Institute (Washington, DC/San Diego, CA)
        http://www.performanceweb.org/Training
Note: For competition funding purposes, approximately $5,000 per announced FTE under study
is allocated to each competition. This includes $1,500 for preliminary planning, $2,500 for the
competition itself, and $1,000 for transition activities. These funds can be used to cover training
costs.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
                                               K-2
APPENDIX L―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT AND MEDIA RELEASES


                                         L APPENDIX L―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT
                                             AND DECISION MEDIA RELEASES

                       L.1. SAMPLE COMPETITION ANNOUNCEMENT MEDIA RELEASE

        L.2. SAMPLE RESULTS ANNOUNCEMENT AWARDING TO CONTRACTOR DECISION

                L.3.   EXAMPLE RESULTS ANNOUNCEMENT AWARDING TO MEO DECISION




L.1 SAMPLE COMPETITION ANNOUNCEMENT MEDIA RELEASE

DLA Announces Public-Private Competition of Two Defense Distribution
Depots

Fort Belvoir, Va. -- The Defense Logistics Agency announced today that it would conduct
public-private competitions, using the revised Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76,
for selected installations services support functions at the Defense Distribution Depots in
Susquehanna, Pa.(DDSP) and San Joaquin, Calif. (DDJC). Both depots operate under the
oversight of Defense Distribution Center, New Cumberland, Pa.

Competitive sourcing includes the public-private competition process required by OMB for all
―commercial-like‖ functions currently being performed by federal work forces. The process
follows the guidelines described in the OMB Circular and examines the financial impact of
providing installation services support at the depots in-house, by the current government work
force, or under contract by a private-sector firm. The two studies are expected to last 18 months.

DDSP is the eastern DLA Strategic Distribution Platform, with facilities at New Cumberland and
Mechanicsburg. DDJC is the western DLA Strategic Distribution Platform, with facilities at
Tracy and Sharpe. Both depots provide military repair parts, clothing and textiles, medical
supplies and industrial and electronic components to military customers throughout the United
States and the world.

The functions to be competed include: facilities and infrastructure operations, maintenance and
repair, grounds, material handling equipment and vehicle maintenance and repair, refuse,
locksmith services, special event support, pest control services, mail services, passenger services,
major accident and natural disaster response, work request processing, and supply.

The DDSP study will include all listed functions at the New Cumberland facility and only the
equipment maintenance function at the Mechanicsburg facility. The DDJC study will include all
listed installation services functions at Tracy and Sharpe.

The Defense Distribution Center, headquartered in New Cumberland, Pa., has oversight of 26
distribution depots worldwide. Its mission is to distribute, store and manage materiel and


JULY 20, 2011
                                                L-1
APPENDIX L―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT AND MEDIA RELEASES



information, enabling a seamless, tailored worldwide DOD distribution network that provides
effective and efficient support to the combatant commands, military services and other agencies -
- in theater and out -- during war and in peace.

DLA provides supply support, and technical and logistics services to the military services and to
several civilian agencies. Headquartered at Fort Belvoir, Va., DLA is the one source for nearly
every consumable item, whether for combat readiness, emergency preparedness or day-to-day
operations.


L.2. SAMPLE RESULTS ANNOUNCEMENT AWARDING TO CONTRACTOR DECISION



Defense Logistics Agency Confirms Defense Distribution Depot San Joaquin
California (DDJC) BASOPs Co
10/25/2006
DLA Public Affairs
(703) 767-6200
DLApublicaffairs@dla.mil

The Defense Logistics Agency today confirmed the performance decision announced on
September 1, 2006 that selected installations services support functions of its Defense
Distribution Depot San Joaquin, Calif., (DDJC) would be contracted out to NANA Services,
LLP, headquartered near Seattle, Washington. No contests were received during the ten-day
window allowed under the Federal Acquisition Regulation in accordance with the Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-76, ―Performance of Commercial Activities‖. Per the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the decision becomes final the day following the closing of
the contest period when no contests are received. For DDJC BASOPs, the decision became final
on September 29, 2006.

DDJC is the western DLA Strategic Distribution Platform, with facilities at Tracy and Sharpe,
Calif.
The depot provides military repair parts, clothing and textiles, medical supplies and industrial
and electronic components to military customers throughout the United States and the world.


The performance decision announcement culminated 18 months of public/private competition
using the guidelines of OMB Circular A-76. The Circular establishes federal policy for deciding
whether to retain recurring, commercial-like activities within the government, or contract them
out to a private sector source. The guidance tells how to compare performance and cost related
information to arrive at the best overall value for the taxpayer.




JULY 20, 2011
                                               L-2
APPENDIX L―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT AND MEDIA RELEASES



DDJC is under the direct oversight of Defense Distribution Center, headquartered in New
Cumberland, Pa. DDC‘s mission is to distribute, store and manage materiel and information,
enabling a seamless, tailored worldwide DOD distribution network that provides effective and
efficient support to the combatant commands, military services and other agencies -- in theater
and out -- during war and in peace.

The DLA provides supply support, and technical and logistics services to the military services
and to several civilian agencies. Headquartered at Fort Belvoir, Va., DLA is the one source for
nearly every consumable item, whether for combat readiness, emergency preparedness or day-to-
day operations.



L.3.   EXAMPLE RESULTS ANNOUNCEMENT AWARDING TO MEO DECISION


Defense Logistics Agency Announces [Activity Under Study activity type] Competition
Results
The Defense Logistics Agency announced today that operations and management of its [Activity
Under Study name and location] will remain in-house. The [Activity Under Study type], with its
workforce of career federal employees, was selected to streamline and reduce the costs of the
[type of commercial activity service] mission at the [name] installation.
This announcement culminates more than a year of public-private competition using the
guidelines of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, "Performance of Commercial
Activities." The process establishes federal policy for deciding whether to retain recurring,
commercial-like activities within the government, or contract them out to a private-sector source.
The guidance tells how to compare performance and cost-related information to arrive at the best
overall value for the taxpayer.
"[Quote from J-3 Director regarding the announcement]," said Major General Hawthorne L.
Proctor, Director, DLA's Logistics Operations.
In [month and year], DLA announced that [Requiring Activity/Activity Under Study activity type]
would undergo public/private competition. [Activity Under Study name] is the [#]th of [total #]
sites to complete the process. [Brief statement on history of Activity Under Study competitions to
date]. The remaining [Activity Under Study activity type]s are being competed in phases over a
[#]-year period ending in mid-[year].
[Activity Under Study name]'s workforce provides worldwide [type of mission] support to [List
customers and combat and combat support systems]. The [Activity Under Study activity type]‘s
primary customers are the [List primary customers].
"[Quote from Activity Under Study commander or director]," said [Name of Activity Under Study
commander or director].
The [Activity Under Study name and location] is a field activity of the [Requiring Activity name
and location].

JULY 20, 2011
                                               L-3
APPENDIX L―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT AND MEDIA RELEASES


The Defense Logistics Agency provides supply support and technical and logistics services to
the military services and to several civilian agencies. Headquartered at Fort Belvoir, VA, DLA
is the one source for nearly every consumable item, whether for combat readiness, emergency
preparedness or day-to-day operations.




JULY 20, 2011
                                              L-4
APPENDIX M―SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL AND UNION NOTIFICATION LETTERS


                                            M APPENDIX M—SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL
                                              AND UNION NOTIFICATION LETTERS


                  M.1 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 STUDY

         M.2 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 TENTATIVE DECISION

                      M.3 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR RIF

                 M.4 SAMPLE UNION NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 AWARD DECISION



M.1 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 STUDY

DL



Honorable (Insert Name)
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator (Insert Name):

         This letter is to inform you of the Defense Logistics Agency's (DLA) plans to conduct public-
private competitions for selected logistics functions at (Insert Number) (Insert Requiring Activity) in the
continental United States. In (Insert Date), DLA announced that most of its (Insert Function) would
undergo public-private competition. These studies are conducted in accordance with the guidelines set
forth in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76. We anticipate this study will take
approximately 30 months and cost (Insert Number) million, which will be paid from the Defense-Wide
Working Capital Fund, budgetary line items 101 (Executive, General and Special Schedule); 308 (Travel
of Persons); 391 (Contract Consultants); and 989 (Other Contracts).

        The (Insert Number) (Insert Function) to undergo public-private competition will be those
located in (Insert Location) (Insert Number of Employees);. (Insert Number) (Insert Function) have
already completed the process and an additional (Insert Number) are currently undergoing study. The
remaining (Insert Function) are being competed in phases scheduled to end in spring of (Insert Date).

         The A-76 process is intended to achieve efficiencies and economies in the performance of
recurring commercial activities that could be performed by the private sector, with no degradation in
national security or in the discretionary exercise of government authority. The process offers a fair and
effective approach for achieving needed savings and efficiencies in our distribution mission, which is
imperative if we are to provide the Military Services affordable, reliable logistics support. We certify that
this study is not the result of a decision by DLA to impose predetermined constraints or limitations on
employees in terms of man-years, end-strengths, full-time equivalent positions, or maximum number of
employees.

       We look forward to working with you and the members of your staff as we prepare for the fiscal
and operational challenges in the years ahead.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                                      APPENDIX
                                                    M-1
APPENDIX M―SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL AND UNION NOTIFICATION LETTERS


                                                 Sincerely,




                                                 Deputy Director
                                                 Logistics Operations


M.2 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 TENTATIVE DECISION

DL


Honorable (Insert Name)
Chairman, Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support
Committee on Armed Services
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
        The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and
its subordinate activity, the (Insert Requiring Activity), have completed the public-private
competition to operate (Insert Activity Under Study). The apparent winning entity is the (Insert
Winning Entity), whose formal bid for operating the (Insert Function) for 5 years was
approximately (Insert Number) percent lower than the cost of operations at study announcement.
Consequently, operations at the (Insert Function) are expected to convert to (Insert Winning
Offeror) performance in (Insert Date).
        Begun in (Insert Date), the study was conducted in accordance with the procedures set
forth in the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, Performance of Commercial
Activities. Eligible appellants will have until Wednesday, (Insert Date), to appeal the decision,
based on cost comparison information that will be made available on Monday, (Insert Date).
Consequently, the selection of (Insert Winning Offeror) remains subject to review. Upon
expiration of the appeal process, we will provide you final notification as required by 10 U.S.C.
2461.

        (Insert Activity Under Study) is one of (Insert Number) (Insert Requiring Activity)
presently undergoing A-76 review. DLA has already completed A-76 competitions involving
(Insert Number) other (Insert Function). This action is part of a comprehensive strategy to
maintain and improve service to our customers, while reducing costs and gaining efficiencies.
       (Insert Activity Under Study) has a current workforce of approximately (Insert Number)
Federal civilian employees, down from a total of (Insert Number) announced in the study at bid
opening. Please be assured that we will do everything within our authority to ensure a smooth
conversion to (Winning Entity) performance and mitigate the need for adverse personnel actions.
Displaced (Enter Activity Under Study) employees are guaranteed right of first refusal for jobs

JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
                                               M-2
APPENDIX M―SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL AND UNION NOTIFICATION LETTERS


created by the contract and for which they are qualified. To minimize the need for involuntary
separations, we will offer early-retirement and separation-pay incentives to eligible employees.
Those individuals not eligible for such offers will be able to register in the Department of
Defense (DOD) Priority Placement Program, through which they will be given priority
consideration for vacant DOD positions for which they are qualified. To minimize the need for
involuntary separations, we will offer early-retirement and separation-pay incentives to eligible
employees. Those individuals not eligible for such offers will be able to register in the
Department of Defense (DOD) Priority Placement Program, through which they will be given
priority consideration for vacant DOD positions for which they are qualified.
     If you need additional information on this action, please call (Point of Contact) of the
DLA Congressional Affairs staff at (phone number).
        Sincerely,




        Deputy Director
        Logistics Operations


M.3 SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION FOR RIF

DL


Honorable (Insert Name)
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator (Insert Name):
         This letter is to notify you of management actions that affect your constituency. On
(Insert Date), we informed you that the Defense Logistics Agency‘s subordinate activity, the
(Insert Requiring Activity), had completed the public-private competition to operate the (Insert
Activity Under Study). The apparent winning entity was determined to be (Insert Winning
Entity). We informed you that directly affected parties had 30 days to appeal the decision and
upon expiration of the appeal process, we would provide final notification as required by 10
U.S.C. 2461. The appeal period closed on (Insert Date). The Administrative Appeal Authority
has reviewed submitted appeals and has upheld the tentative decision. Consequently, operations
at the depot are expected to convert to (Insert Winning Entity) at the end of (Insert Date). As a
result, (Insert Activity Under Study) will undergo a Reduction-in-Force (RIF) which will affect
approximately (Insert Number) permanent employees, to be effective on or about (Insert Date).
The official RIF letters are to be issued on (Insert Date).
        Department of Defense (DOD) Priority Placement Program registration counseling dates,
early registration, and counseling began (Insert Date). This program provides referrals to

JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
                                               M-3
APPENDIX M―SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL AND UNION NOTIFICATION LETTERS


equivalent positions at other DOD activities. Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay (VSIP) and
Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) have been offered and (Insert Number)
employees have signed up for VSIP/VERA.
     If you have questions about this action, please contact (Insert Name) at (703) (Insert
Number)
                                                Sincerely,


                                                (Insert Signing Authority)


M.4 SAMPLE UNION NOTIFICATION FOR A-76 AWARD DECISION

DL

(Union Leader Contact Information)

Dear (Union Leader):

      I am writing to inform you of the A-76 competition performance decision for base
operations (BASOPs) at the Defense Distribution Depot, San Joaquin, California (DDJC). The
Source Selection Authority conducted the cost comparison and determined the lowest price,
technically acceptable offeror to be the Alaskan Native Corporation firm, NANA Services, LLC,
whose formal offer for providing installations services support to the depot for five years was
approximately 35 percent lower than the in-house agency tender for the Most Efficient
Organization. The cost comparison was accomplished in accordance with the requirements of
Office of Management Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-76 (Revised May 2003).

        The DDJC BASOPs organization under competition has a current workforce of 59
permanent full-time civilian employees, and supports the DDJC Strategic Distribution Platform
at Tracy and Sharpe for the following services: facilities operations, maintenance, and repair;
utilities operation, maintenance, and repair; grounds maintenance and repair; equipment
maintenance and repair; and mail services.

     Directly interested parties, as defined in OMB Circular A-76, Attachment D, may submit
contests challenging specified aspects of the cost comparison performance decision, in
accordance with Request For Proposal Section L05, the Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart
33.103, Protests to the Agency, and OMB Circular A-76, Attachment B, Section F.

     We plan to work closely with you and affected employees to ensure a smooth transition. We
will make maximum use of all appropriate programs to assist in the transition by providing
aggressive outplacement assistance to the affected employees. This includes advising them
regarding Voluntary Early Retirement Authority, Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay, registration
in the Department of Defense Priority Placement Program, and other placement assistance. Please
contact (DLA Human Resources Representative), (DL) at (phone number) if you have any labor-

JULY 20, 2011                                                                           APPENDIX
                                              M-4
APPENDIX M―SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL AND UNION NOTIFICATION LETTERS


management relation questions regarding this notification, or (J-7 Representative) at (phone
number) regarding A-76 Cost Comparison questions.

                                                  Sincerely,




                                                  (Insert Signature of Signing Authority)

cc:
(Insert Union Executive Board Members)
(DLA Human Resources Representative)




JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                              M-5
APPENDIX N―PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITIONS IN FEDBIZOPPS


                                             N APPENDIX N―PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF
                                                 PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITION IN
                                                           FEDBIZOPPS


                   (NOTE: DO NOT USE ABBREVIATIONS OR ACRONYMS)

D-OMB Circular A-76: Department of Defense Public-Private Competition of __________
(insert the commercial activities to be competed, e.g., public works, information technology, , transportation)
performed by the ________________________(insert the DOD Component Name (e.g., Department of
the Navy, Defense Logistics Agency) and, as applicable, major command, claimant, subordinate activity)
located at ________________________________________(insert the locations of the activities to be
competed, e.g., Fort Belvoir, Virginia; Langley Air Force Base, Virginia; Arlington, Virginia)

Document Type: Special Notice
POC: (insert appropriate point of contact)
Classification Code:

Description: THIS IS NOT A SOLICITATION NOTICE. In accordance with Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-76 (Revised), Performance of Commercial Activities, May
29, 2003, this notice represents the formal public announcement and official start date of a
public-private competition of (insert the commercial activities as stated above) performed at (insert the
locations as stated above). The incumbent service providers affected by this public-private
competition are approximately (insert total number) of DOD government personnel positions [(insert
number) of DOD civilians and (insert number) of military), and (insert number and provide list) of DOD
contractors.

                                           A standard competition will be conducted in
For a standard competition insert the following:
accordance with the revised circular. The solicitation will be issued at a later date. Prospective
private sector and public reimbursable service providers are encouraged to respond to the
solicitation.

The Department of Defense Competitive Sourcing Official is (insert name of current official),
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment). The DOD Component
Competitive Sourcing Official for the Defense Logistics Agency is (insert name of current director),
Director. The date of this public announcement is the official start date for this public-private
competition and the projected end date of the competition is (insert date). The contracting officer
is (insert name and title) and the agency tender official is (insert name and title). The point of contact
for questions regarding this public-private competition is (insert name, title, and phone number/email
address).

                                               A streamlined competition will be conducted in
For a streamlined competition insert the following:
accordance with the revised circular. The estimated contract cost will be based on market
research and the agency cost estimate will be calculated in accordance with the circular using
performance periods that will consist of a base year and four option years. Prospective service
providers are advised that a solicitation (1) will not be issued if the estimated cost of contract


JULY 20, 2011
                                                      N-1
APPENDIX N―PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITIONS IN FEDBIZOPPS


performance is greater than the cost of agency performance, and (2) will be issued if the
estimated cost of agency performance is greater than the cost of contract performance.




JULY 20, 2011
                                               N-2
 APPENDIX O―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT SCHEDULE


                                               O APPENDIX O—SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT
                                                           SCHEDULE

 Note: This sample was used used in a previous competition and is for reference only. Not all
 steps will be identical in other competitions. While creating the schedule it is important to name
 specific individuals from each office when determining responsibilities and contacts.


                                               FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
                                               Revision # 2 – February 3, 2005
                                                                              Time
             Contact/Action                     Responsibility    Date                                      Commen
                                                                             EST
                                                                                         Preliminary Planning begins for
 Preliminary Planning                          All               7/1/2004
                                                                                         under new Circular

Prepare/Submit 18 Month Time Limit Waiver                                                Signed by CCSO, Coordination
                                               DDC/J-75          8/31/2004
to OSD                                                                                   Approval Received from OSD


Pre-Announcement briefing to J-7 via VTC       DSCC/DDC/J-75     2/7/2005                DDC Deputy Commander to at


                                                                                         Can be advised by phone, visit,
Schedule appointment for J-3 and Director      J-75
                                                                 2/11/2005               Staff Meeting in advance of ann
notification (See Steps 17 & 18)
                                                                                         03/04/2005


Schedule call time to call J-4 Director and
                                               J-75              2/11/2005
ADUSD-SCI (See Steps 21 & 22)


Schedule call time between J-7 - DLA AFGE
                                               J-75              2/11/2005               Schedule call time for 1100 on
Council/AFGE National- (See Step 25)


Draft Congressional Notification Letters       J-75              2/11/2005               Coordination: DG, DP, DL, & D

Draft Pre-Announcement talking points for J-
                                                                                         Notify MG (Step 17). Then noti
3&       J-7‘s use in Staff Meeting or         J-75              2/11/2005
                                                                                         Director (Step 18).
Corporate Board Meeting

Draft DLA Council of Unions Letters            J-75              2/11/2005               Coordination: DG, DDC, DP, D

Draft Press Release (Re-Work for Feb 4,
                                               DP                2/17/2005               Coordinate with DDC, J-75
2005 Announcement Date)




 JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
                                                      O-1
 APPENDIX O―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT SCHEDULE




DSCC will submit FEDBIZOPS
                                                                                   J-75 will forward FEDBIZOPS
announcement to      J-75 for                DSCC               2/18/2005   1100
                                                                                   for coordination to H&CS.
review/coordination with OSD.


Notify OSD (Office of Housing &
                                                                                   Courtesy Call to Inform OSD o
Competitive Sourcing) of Upcoming            J-75               2/18/2005
                                                                                   Announcement
Announcement

Complete Union Fact Sheet for J-7 Use when
                                             J-75               2/24/2005          Provide to J-7
Calling Union on 03/04/2005
Complete Congressional & Union
                                             J-75               2/24/2005
Notification Letters
Complete Press Release & Q&As                DP                 2/25/2005          DDC assists

Have J-7 Director Sign Congressional &
                                             J-75               2/25/2005
Union Notification Letters

Notify J-3 Director                          J-7                2/25/2005          Must occur prior to Step 18


                                                                                   Advise by phone, visit, Corpora
Notify Director/Deputy Director              J-3                2/28/2005
                                                                                   Meeting in advance of announc


Notify DG                                    DG                 2/28/2005

Notify DDJC & DDSP Commanders                DDC-D              3/3/2005

Notify/Call J-4 Director                     J-75               3/3/2005

Notify/Call ADUSD-SCI                        J-75               3/3/2005

Notify Housing & Competitive Sourcing
                                             J-75               3/4/2005    0900   Notify via e-mail
(OSD), that announcement is underway


Begin Congressional Notification             DL                 3/4/2005    1000


                                                                                   Notify Union by phone call and
Notify DLA AFGE Council/AFGE National-       J-7/J-13 assists   3/4/2005    1100
                                                                                   7 Executive Director to assist w


                                             DDJC & DDSP                           Local union should be notified
Notify Local Union                                              3/4/2005    1100
                                             Commanders                            briefed

Notify DDC/DLA AFGE Council Vice
                                             DDC-DD             3/4/2005    1100   Notify by fax/letter
Presidents

                                             DDC Command
Notify Local Legislative Representatives                        3/4/2005    1300   Fax press release
                                             Affairs


 JULY 20, 2011                                                                        APPENDIX
                                                      O-2
 APPENDIX O―SAMPLE ANNOUNCEMENT SCHEDULE



                                            DDJC & DDSP
Brief Workforce                                           3/4/2005   1300
                                            Commanders


                                            DSCC,DDSP &
FedBizOpps Announcement                                   3/4/2005   1300
                                            DDJC


Issue Press Releases (National and Local)   DP            3/4/2005   1300   Wire/Internet/Fax

Notify Current/Existing Service Providers   DDC           3/4/2005   1300

Update DLA A-76 Library & Directory Web
                                            J-75          3/4/2005   1400
Site
Update A-76 Contracting Web Site            DSCC          3/4/2005   1400




 JULY 20, 2011                                                                APPENDIX
                                                   O-3
APPENDIX P―RELEASE OF INFORMATION


                                        P APPENDIX P—RELEASE OF INFORMATION

In public-private competitions, access to information is critical. However, personnel need to be
aware of limitations on the access and dissemination of information. Federal law makes it a
crime to disclose a company‘s trade secrets, processes, operations, and procurement-sensitive,
and other confidential information without permission. Release of this or other information may
result in an unfair competitive advantage for the recipient of the information. To further the
overall policy of maintaining a level playing field in the public-private competition, the
following discussion offers some guidelines on what information should be available to the
public, employees, support contractors, and potential competing contractors. Several areas that
merit attention include the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) procedures and guidance; the
handling of procurement-sensitive information; nondisclosure statements; protective marking of
information as For Official Use Only (FOUO); additional safeguards to avoid improper release
and posting of material on the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) A-76 Web site.

Freedom of Information Act

FOIA generally provides that any person has a statutory right to access Federal agency records,
except to the extent that such records or portions are protected from disclosure by a FOIA
exemption or FOIA special law enforcement exclusion. Moreover, the FOIA exemptions
provide a framework for making policy decisions on whether to release information. FOIA‘s
exemptions and exclusions have balanced the public‘s right to know about the workings of its
government with the competing interests concerned with the preservation of the confidentiality
of sensitive personal, commercial, and government information.

In the area of public-private competitions, government employees will likely receive many
requests for information, some of which may be exempt from mandatory disclosure. Some
requests may be received for information that is not even accessible under FOIA, such as the
personal notes of an individual (provided they are not shared, filed with official records, or used
in the decision-making process); a person's memory; documents not yet created; and personal
calendars and phone logs. All personnel having access to protected A-76 information are
required to have a signed non-disclosure statement on file with the A-76 KO and DSCC-DR. In
order to respond to FOIA requests, FOIA personnel require access to the requested documents.
Accordingly, personnel in FOIA offices of activities undergoing an A-76 competition must
provide DSCC-DR with the signed non-disclosure statements within 10 days after
announcement.

Information requests may not always come in the form of a written FOIA request. Employees
should be careful not to provide information requested in a more casual manner such as over the
phone, in person, or by e-mail. Employees should respond to verbal or e-mail requests by
referring the requestor to the FOIA Manager. Questions or concerns about A-76 information
requests should be addressed to the local Office of General Counsel and the local FOIA program
office. Most release of information issues can be addressed only on a case-by-case basis with
specific factual details known.

Although not comprehensive, the following is a short list of the FOIA exemptions most likely to
be relevant.

JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                P-1
APPENDIX P―RELEASE OF INFORMATION


Exemption 1: Requestors are unlikely to request FOUO information relating to the public-
private competition or classified information.
Exemption 2: Internal administrative and personnel matters are exempt where their release
would risk circumvention of agency regulations or impede their effectiveness.
Exemption 3: Documents that another federal statute specifically orders not to be disclosed are
exempt from disclosure. Examples: 41 U.S.C. § 423 (Procurement Integrity) prohibits release of
some procurement information during negotiations; 10 U.S.C. § 2305(g) prohibits release of
proposals submitted in response to a solicitation unless the proposal has been incorporated by
reference within a contract.

These statutes may also carry a civil or criminal penalty for release. The Procurement Integrity
Act, as amended, prohibits employees having access to ―source selection information‖ from
releasing that information before a final decision, that is, before the decision is made whether the
work is to remain in-house or is to be contracted out. Employees involved in the source selection
process will sign a statement acknowledging the limitations on disclosure and the penalties for
improper release. The following are some examples of information that should be considered
and marked as source selection information:

•   Agency Tender
•   Most efficient organization
•   Agency cost estimate
•   Offer prices or proposed prices or costs
•   Source selection plans
•   Technical evaluation plans
•   Technical evaluation of proposals
•   Cost or price evaluations of proposals
•   Competitive range determinations
•   Rankings of offers, proposals
•   Reports and evaluations of source selection panels, boards, or advisory panels
•   Other information marked as ―Source Selection Information—See Far 3.104.‖

Information marked as ―Source Selection Sensitive‖ is based on a case-by-case determination by
the agency head or designee or by the contracting officer that disclosure of the information
would jeopardize the integrity or successful completion of the federal agency procurement. This
would include information that, if disclosed, would put an offeror including the Agency Tender,
at a competitive disadvantage.

The unauthorized release of source selection information may subject the offending employee (as
well as the recipient of the information) to a fine, imprisonment of up to 5 years, and a civil
penalty that may exceed $50,000. Also, employees should note that unauthorized release of this
information to competitors could put the in-house offer at a disadvantage. Potential offerors
seeking information should be referred to the contracting officer who may refer questions
regarding the release to the local Office of Counsel and FOIA program office.

Exemption 4: Proprietary or commercial information submitted by the public with the
understanding it would be kept on a ―proprietary‖ basis is exempt. Examples: company assets,

JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                P-2
APPENDIX P―RELEASE OF INFORMATION


liabilities, and net worth; supplier and customer lists; cost of raw materials; pricing strategies;
labor costs; profit ratios; etc. The risk here is a ―reverse‖ FOIA action, where a company sues
the government for releasing its proprietary information and shows commercial injury.
Exemption 5: Internal, predecisional opinions and recommendations; government-generated
commercial information, attorney work products, and attorney-client communications are
exempt. Examples: Opinions and recommendations not adopted; future year budget
information, tentative plans to acquire services or commodities, government cost figures/pricing
strategies in an A-76 comparison, attorney evaluation of proposed plans, and draft copies of
documents, provided the government can show some harm would result from release. The risk
here is that releasing too much information might create an insurmountable competitive
disadvantage for the government Most Efficient Organization (MEO).
Exemption 6: Personal privacy. Examples: names of individuals on reduction in force (RIF)
lists; misconduct reports, performance evaluations (even favorable ones); take-home pay;
personal, intimate details of a person‘s life; medical condition; religious affiliation. Employees
also need to be aware that the Privacy Act information contained in a system of records cannot
be released without the written permission of the affected individual. Risk is civil fines.

This is an abbreviated list. It is important to remember that as documents are generated, they are
likely to become the subject of FOIA requests. As the final documents are prepared, they should
be prepared with the understanding that they might be released to the public in response to an
FOIA request.

For Official Use Only Information

For Official Use Only (FOUO) is a protective marking designed to be applied to information
considered to be exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Information that has been classified in the
interests of national security is excluded from the ―FOUO‖ definition. Keep these points in
mind:

       Mark records as ―FOUO‖ at the time of creation. Where appropriate, the marking may
        contain a more specific warning (such as ―Negotiation Sensitive‖) to alert handlers to the
        special nature of the FOUO material. An FOUO marking does not mean that the record
        will automatically be withheld from an FOIA requestor, but it provides the agency with
        notice of content and facilitates review.
       The FOUO mark is to appear on each page that contains sensitive information. If outside
        covers are used, the front and back are also to be marked.
       FOUO material transmitted outside the Department of Defense (DOD) requires an
        expanded marking to explain the significance of the FOUO legend. Include the following
        statement on the document before transfer: ―This document contains information exempt
        from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Exemption(s). Refer
        requests for this document to HQ Defense Logistics Agency, Attn: DP, 8725 John J.
        Kingman Road, #2533, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6221.‖
       After duty hours, FOUO material is to be stored to preclude unauthorized access.


JULY 20, 2011                                                                                APPENDIX
                                                 P-3
APPENDIX P―RELEASE OF INFORMATION


       DLA Form 22, For Official Use Only cover sheet, is used for documents. DLA Label
        1804, For Official Use Only Sticker, may be used to label disks, film canisters, and
        similar housing devices.
•   Further details on FOUO are contained in the DLA One Book.

Safeguarding Sensitive Information

Employees directly or indirectly involved with an A-76 competition must safeguard sensitive
information. Employees that are directly involved with an A-76 competition are required to sign
nondisclosure forms addressing what information must be safeguarded and if/when release
would be authorized. The specific forms differ depending on the person's role in the process.
Employees that are not required to sign nondisclosure statements still must safeguard sensitive
information. Those whose jobs bring them in contact with information relevant to an A-76
competition must remember not to discuss or disclose this information outside the agency, unless
authorized. These restrictions are to protect the competitive process, ensure that all competitors
have equal access to information, and preserve the integrity of the process. Questions about
release can be directed to your office of counsel or the contracting officer.

Nondisclosure Statement

All personnel involved in the public-private competitions that have access to negotiation
sensitive information will sign a nondisclosure and conflict of interest statement. Basically, the
nondisclosure and conflict of interest statement contains the following points:

I acknowledge that my official duties (or contract responsibilities for a contractor employee)
cause me to have access to an A-76 competition. I am aware that unauthorized disclosure of
source selection or proposal information (including the government‘s Agency Tender) could
damage the integrity of this procurement and that the transmission or revelation of such
information to unauthorized persons could subject me to prosecution under the Procurement
Integrity Laws or under other applicable laws.
I will not divulge, publish, or reveal by word, conduct, or any other means, such information or
knowledge, except as necessary to do so in the performance of my official duties related to this
competition and in accordance with the laws of the United States, unless specifically authorized
in writing in each and every case by a duly authorized representative of the United States
Government.
I acknowledge that the information I receive will be given only to persons specifically granted
access to the procurement/proposal/source selection sensitive information and may not be further
divulged without specific prior written approval from an authorized individual.
If, at any time during this A-76 competition, my participation might result in a real, apparent,
possible, or potential conflict of interest, I will immediately report the circumstances to the
appropriate authorized individual, i.e., contracting officer, local counsel, or source selection
authority.

Basic Security Precautions to Avoid Accidental Releases of Potentially Sensitive
Information
JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
                                                P-4
APPENDIX P―RELEASE OF INFORMATION


       Send encrypted e-mail when communicating regarding procurement- sensitive documents
        and decisions. Also, when responding to encrypted e-mail, make sure your
        communication back has the same security precautions in place.
       Make sure employees leaving government service have been removed from mailing lists
        and access to government systems and have turned over their passwords to government
        computer systems and these passwords are disabled.
       Do not leave sensitive information on desks, on your computer screen, or discuss such
        information in common areas of the office, cafeteria, break rooms, or bathrooms.
       Support contractors whose work requires access to A-76 information should also sign a
        nondisclosure and conflict of interest statement.
       Information given to contractors will be restricted to that which is necessary to fulfill the
        terms of the contract. Employees should be sensitive regarding what information they
        discuss with and around support contractors. Currently, there is a DOD Standards of
        Conduct Office (DOD/GC-SOCO) working group creating additional guidance regarding
        the unique ethics questions that arise when government employees and contractor
        employees are working side by side.
       If FOUO material is given to contractors, they should be made aware of the special
        protection requirements. At contract termination, FOUO material is to be destroyed or
        returned to the agency.

Web Site/Clearinghouse

The Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD) has an established agency A-76 Web site for DLA (at
http://www.dla.mil/j-3/A-76/A-76Main.html ). It is linked to the electronic FOIA home page.
The Web site contains general information and should reduce the number of FOIA requests.
Below are examples of what may be found on the DLA A-76 home page:

•   RFP
•   Questions and answers
•   Press releases
•   Links to other A-76 resources—Air Force, Army, Navy, OMB
•   Any document that is determined to be releasable under FOIA that has likelihood of
    repetitive requests.

The Contracting Office has a web page at www.supply.dla.mil/A76.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
                                                 P-5
      APPENDIX Q―SAMPLE DECISION SCHEDULE


                                               Q APPENDIX Q—SAMPLE DECISION SCHEDULE




      Note: This sample was used used in a previous competition and is for reference only. Not all
      steps will be identical in other competitions. While creating the schedule it is important to name
      specific individuals from each office when determining responsibilities and contacts.

                                                                   Time
           Contact/Action             Responsibility   Due Date                           Comments
                                                                   EST



      Reconvene Source Selection
√ 1   Advisory Council                KO               8/15/2006



      Complete Standard
√ 2   Competition Form (SCF)          KO               8/17/2006



      Schedule J-3 visit/phone call
√ 3   to D                            J-3              8/18/2006           Inform D of SSA decision (see Step 7)


      Schedule phone call time to                                         Call to be scheduled for August 24th (see Step
√ 4   DV                              J-7              8/18/2006          8)




                                                                          Calls to be scheduled for August 31th
      Schedule phone call time                                            (see Step 18); H&CS  Housing &
√5    ADUSD-SCI                       J-7              8/22/2006          Competitive Sourcing (OSD)

√ 6   Present Results to SSA          KO               8/24/2006   1030
√ 7   Notify D                        J-3              8/24/2006   1200


√ 8   Notify DV                       J-7              8/24/2006   1200




      Notify DLA Congressional &                                          Deliver DLA Form 1693 received from KO if
√ 9   Public Affairs Offices          J-75             8/24/2006   1300   award decision is to the Commercial Offeror.



      JULY 20, 2011                                                                                   APPENDIX
       APPENDIX Q―SAMPLE DECISION SCHEDULE




√ 10   Notify Depot Commander          DDC-D             8/24/2006   1300   1000 Pacific Standard Time



       Draft Congressional
√ 11   Notification Letters            J-75              8/24/2006          Coordination with DL and DP


       Draft DLA Council Union                                              Coordinate with J-7, J-13, and CSO-N Labor
√ 12   Letter                          J-75              8/24/2006          Relations



       DDC provides data to J-75       DDC A-76
√ 13   for OSD point paper             Program Manager   8/24/2006   1600




       Complete point paper for call
       to SCI & H&CS use (Step                                              Coordinate with DDC. J-75 will prepare point
√14    18)                             J-75              8/28/2006   1700   paper & hand-off . Also coordinated with J-8.

                                                                            Obtain DDC, DES, DG, & DL coordination
       Complete Congressional                                               and submit for
√15    Notification Letters            J-75              8/28/2006   1700   J-7 signature


                                                                            J-7, J-13, and CSO-N Labor Relations –
       Complete DLA Council                                                 Provide copies of press release and
√16    Union Letter                    J-75              8/28/2006   1700   congressional letter;


                                                                            DDC Deputy Commander to sign on Aug 28
       Complete DDC AFGE Vice                                               prior to TDY departure; letters to be faxed on
√17    Presidents Letters              DDC/CSO-N         8/28/2006   1700   Sep 1 (See Step 25)

√18a   Advise ADUSD-SCI                J-7               8/31/2006   1330   Via phone, using point paper.


18b    Advise H&CS                     J-7               8/31/2006   1100   Via phone, using point paper.


                                                                            J-75 and DDC assist; DG & DL coordination.
                                                                            Provided Q&As to DL on Aug 30 and J-75 on
√19    Complete Q&As                   DP                8/30/2006   1600   Aug 31.




       JULY 20, 2011                                                                                     APPENDIX
       APPENDIX Q―SAMPLE DECISION SCHEDULE




                                                                      Coordinate with DDC , J-75, DG, & DL.
       Complete Summary Level                                         Provided press release to DL on Aug 30 and J-
√20    Press Release                 DP            8/30/2006   1600   75 on Aug 31.
       Begin Congressional
√21    Notification                  DL            9/1/2006    1000   Notify by phone/fax
       Notify Housing &
       Competitive Sourcing,
√22    DUSD(I&E)                     J-75          9/1/2006    1000   Notify by phone/fax



                                     J-7
                                                                      Notify Union by phone call and fax signed
√23    Notify DLA AFGE Council       J-13 assist   9/1/2006    1415   letter by J-7 Executive Director

       Notify Local Union
                                                                      Local union should be notified right before
                                     DDJC                             workforce is briefed;     1115 Pacific
√24    (Notify J-13)                 Commander     9/1/2006    1415   Standard Time

       Notify DDC AFGE Vice
√25    Presidents                    DDC-DD        9/1/2006    1430   Notify by fax/letter



                                                                      DDSP Commander brief DDSP BASOPs
       Brief DDSP BASOPs             DDSP                             workforce at 1300 hours EST on decision
√26a   Workforce                     Commander     8/30/2006   1300   delay

       Brief DDJC BASOPs             DDJC                             DDJC Commander brief DDJC BASOPs
√26b   Workforce                     Commander/    9/1/2006    1430   workforce at 1430 EST

       Notify Local Legislative      DDC Command
√27    Representatives               Affairs       9/1/2006    1430   Fax press release; 1130 Pacific Standard Time
       Post Performance
       Decision Announcement
√28    on www.fedbizopps.gov         KO            9/1/2006    1430
       Notify Agency Tender
       Official (ATO) and
       Commercial Offeror(s) of
√29    Result                        KO            9/1/2006    1430   Notify by phone.
       Issue Press Releases
√30    (National and Local)          DP            9/1/2006    1430   Wire/Internet/Fax

       Notify Host PAO (Send Press   DDC Command
√31    Release and Q&As)             Affairs       9/1/2006    1430   Fax; 1130 Pacific Standard Time
       Update DLA A-76
 32    Contracting Web Site          KO            9/5/2006    P.M.   Send release to DLIS for posting




       JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
     APPENDIX Q―SAMPLE DECISION SCHEDULE



     Provide ATO and
     Commercial Offeror(s) with
33   Required Information            KO                 9/5/2006    P.M.   FEDEX
     Update DLA A-76 Library &
34   Directory Web Site              J-75               9/5/2006    P.M.
     Provide Agency Contest
     Authority (through Mr. Dan
     Poling, DG) with Contest
35   Books                           KO – Ms. Raita     9/5/2006
                                                                    Post
                                                                    1600
36   Issue Mock RIF Letters          CSO-N              9/5/2006    EST
     Priority Placement Program      CSO-N / Depot
37   Briefs                          Commander          9/6/2006
     PPP Counseling & Early                            09/06/06 –
38   Registration                    CSO-N              09/08/06

     Draft RIF Letter Notification                                         Coordinate with J-1; J-3; DDC; DES; DG;
39   Schedule                        J-75              10/6/2006           DL; DP

                                                                           Assumes performance decision is upheld upon
40   Issue Official RIF Letters      CSO-N             10/23/2006          contest.


                                                                           DDC requires 120 + 7 days minimum for
     Complete Transition/Conduct     DDC-J3/4 / CSO-                       transition to allow for RIF notification to
41   RIF                             N                 2/28/2007           employees.




     JULY 20, 2011                                                                                      APPENDIX
APPENDIX R―MEO LETTER OF OBLIGATION


                                      R APPENDIX R—MEO LETTER OF OBLIGATION
                                                     (LOO)

[Usage Note: A sample letter of obligation is provided below. The letter is to be used for all
standard competitions and for streamlined competitions for which a Most Efficient Organization
(MEO) is established.

The letter of obligation should be signed by the contracting officer (KO) and addressed to the
MEO responsible official, an agency official who is deemed to be in the best position to oversee
and be responsible for the performance of the in-house organization. Copies of this letter will
also be provided to other interested parties, including the Agency Tender Official (ATO) and
Competitive Sourcing Division (CSD).]

(Date)
From:         (Insert ATO name, title, and organization information) (Insert contracting officer
equivalent name, title, and organization information)
To:             (MEO Responsible Official, title, and contact information)
Subject:        MEO Letter of Obligation


This Letter of Obligation implements the result of the competitive sourcing competition
conducted through (RFP # and Competition Number). The Agency Tender and Standard
Competition Form are hereby incorporated by reference.

The performance decision has been made in favor of the MEO in accordance with the public-
private competition process pursuant to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No.
A-76, dated May 29, 2003. All actions taken under this Agreement shall be in accordance with
the requirements of the Circular, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Commercial Activities
Guidebook for A-76, and DLA supplemental guidance.

The performance of this agreement shall be in accordance with the Performance Work Statement
(PWS), incorporated herein by reference, and the accepted Agency Tender, which includes the
proposed MEO, Agency Cost Estimate, Operations and Management Plan, Phase-In Plan, and
the Quality Control/Customer Satisfaction Plan.

The Notice to Proceed with performance of the Base Period under this Letter of Obligation is
effective on June 1, 2007. The first 120 days of the Base Period will include the phase-in period.
Upon successful completion of the phase-in, full performance shall be achieved by October 1,
2007. This Letter of Obligation shall remain in effect unless terminated in accordance with
OMB Circular A-76, the DLA A-76 Guidebook, and DLA supplemental guidance.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                            APPENDIX
APPENDIX R―MEO LETTER OF OBLIGATION




(Name of KO) is designated as the Contracting Officer responsible for administering this Letter
of Obligation. Communications shall be directed to (competitions CO) or designee with regard
to any issues concerning the Letter of Obligation.


Signed:

______________________________________________________________
Name, Title                                                 Date
Agency Tender Official

Signed:

_________________________________________________________________
Contracting Officer                                         Date



Attachments:
    1) Section C (PWS) of Solicitation #
    2) AT Volume I: Price Proposal
    3) AT Volume II: Installation Services –
          a. Operations and Management
          b. Quality Control/Customer Satisfaction Plan
          c. Phase-In Plan




JULY 20, 2011                                                                           APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                                       S APPENDIX S—SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS
                                                      PLAN

Note: This sample was used in a past competition and is for reference only. Keep in mind that
each competition is unique in the planning of communication activities in order to best suit the
objectives of the competition and those involved.

1   Goal:

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), as a component of the Department of Defense (DOD), is
committed to supporting the President‘s Management Agenda and the Office of Management
and Budget‘s goals of identifying those activities currently performed by the government that are
commercial in nature. DLA Enterprise Support (DES), in support of the overall DLA
Competitive Sourcing program, conducts preliminary planning studies, or business case
analyses, to determine which functions should be competed among the Government and
commercial offerors to provide the U.S. Taxpayer with the most value for their dollar. To
accomplish this, DES has reviewed our missions, functions, and our workforce and identified
those areas that are commercial in nature. As DES begins the process of studies and
competitions, the DES Commercial Activities Program Office (CAPO) is committed to keeping
the DES Leadership and Workforce informed of the policies and processes being executed in
support of the competitive sourcing program.             DES has established a multi-echelon
communications program that targets specific audiences with a variety of products utilizing the
full range of available media.

2   Objectives:

    2.1 Define appropriate target audiences within DES and develop communications products
tailored to meet the information requirements of those specific audiences.

    2.2 Ensure DES compliance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular
A-76 and supplemental Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), DOD, and DLA policies
through close coordination with the DLA Logistics Operations Competitive Sourcing Division
(J-75), the Legislative Affairs Office, and the Public Affairs Office (PAO).

    2.3 Maintain an open, transparent line of communications with all interested parties.

3   DES A-76 Communications Guidance:

    3.1 General: The process to conduct public-private competitions under OMB Circular A-76
is long and detailed. To ensure that all DES stakeholders are aware of the program, the DES
schedule, and potential implications, DES CAPO will establish and maintain a thorough
stakeholder communication plan.          The following guidance will address the DES
Communications plan during the Preliminary Planning and Competition Phases, and will review
aspects of effective methods to communicate with customers during all phases.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


    3.2 Preliminary Planning Communications: Communications during the Preliminary
Planning phase may be the most crucial of all communications in the A-76 process.
Establishment of an effective, open communications plan, with internal stakeholders and external
parties of interest, sets the tone for the remainder of the process. Educating employees about the
A-76 competitive sourcing process and sharing information regarding potential outcomes will
ease employee concerns and assist in maintaining high morale within the workforce.
Communication strategies ensure stakeholders, customers, and most importantly, affected
employees understand the competition requirements and are not unduly affected by rumors. It is
important that everyone understand why the competition is being conducted, the competition
process and timelines, and the potential impacts to employees and organizations.

       3.2.1 Internal Communication: DES activities should focus on development of the
following products aimed at specific target audiences.

                3.2.1.1 Scheduled Communications Products.

                      3.2.1.1.1 Workforce Newsletter. The DES A-76 Workforce Newsletter
                      will be drafted, staffed, and published by the DES CAPO as a method of
                      communicating A-76 specific issues to the entire workforce. Each quarter,
                      two thematic and one summary newsletters will be published. DES CAPO
                      will draft the initial copy for staffing through Human Resources,
                      J-75, General Counsel, and the office of the DES Director.
                            3.2.1.1.1.1 Thematic. Each quarter, two newsletters will focus on
                            common elements of the A-76 program. These themes will, as
                            closely as possible, reflect preliminary planning events scheduled to
                            support any future competitions.
                            3.2.1.1.1.2 Quarterly Summaries. During the final month of each
                            quarter, DES CAPO will publish a ―Quarterly Wrap-Up‖. This
                            newsletter will address those events undertaken in that quarter, the
                            immediate next steps, and any changes to the overall DES A-76
                            Roadmap.
                            3.2.1.1.1.3 Frequently Asked Questions. Each newsletter will
                            address any questions posed by the workforce regarding any issue
                            within A-76. DES personnel should submit questions to DES at
                            HQDESA76@dla.mil. A library of FAQs may be found at the DLA
                            A-76 Library, maintained by J-75, at http://www.dla.mil/j-3/a-76/a-
                            76main.html.
                      3.2.1.1.2 Supervisor Talking Points (STP). STPs are published as an
                      additional resource during months in which DES CAPO publishes
                      thematic Workforce Newsletters. These STPs provide more information,
                      from the programmatic level, to address specific tendencies/trends within
                      the program elements addressed as the monthly theme. STPs target
                      supervisory and management level personnel to communicate detailed
                      information that they can share on a face-to-face basis with members of
                      the DES Workforce.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                            APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                3.2.1.2 Other DES Internal Requirements.

                       3.2.1.2.1 Intent to Study Notification:         DES CAPO will provide
                       information and decision briefings to the DES Executive Leadership Team
                       (ELT) to set the conditions to initiate preliminary studies, determine
                       scope, and establish a grouping strategy. DES CAPO will provide the
                       goals, objectives, strategy and methodology for conducting the A-76
                       competition and implementing the Action Plan. Roles and responsibilities
                       should be outlined and include instructions for proper disclosure of data
                       among team members and other DES employees. It is strongly suggested
                       that appropriate legal counsel assist in explaining the latter to management
                       and key competition personnel.
                       3.2.1.2.2 Town Hall Inputs. DES CAPO will provide A-76 program
                       updates as a part of the DES Director‘s quarterly town hall program. The
                       DES CAPO Program Manager (PM) will provide technical expertise for
                       questions from personnel at sites or headquarters. DES CAPO will
                       provide any required DES A-76 information to be used by the DES
                       Director, in support of the DLA Director‘s Calls, to answer questions
                       provided by the workforce.
                       3.2.1.2.3 Site Visit Briefings. DES CAPO will, either as a part of the
                       DES Director‘s visits or individually, periodically travel to affected sites
                       to provide face-to-face updates regarding the program and, as permitted,
                       phase of the process currently in execution.

       3.2.2 External Communication: DES should coordinate with J-75, PAO, and
Legislative Affairs in developing the following communications deliverables aimed at the
following audiences (communications with our customers is addressed at 3.4).

                3.2.2.1 Public Announcement (Initiation of Competition). DES will provide
                input/information about the Preliminary Planning Phase and other required
                resources to the DLA A-76 Contracting Center of Excellence (DSCC-DR).
                DSCC-DR will then coordinate all information and inputs to prepare a draft
                www.Fedbizopps.gov notification not later than two weeks prior to scheduled
                public announcement. This notification should be coordinated with OSD not later
                than one week prior to posting the public announcement on the
                www.Fedbizopps.gov website. The official start date of the competition is the
                date of public announcement on the www.Fedbizopps.gov website. DSCC-DR
                will serve as the Action Office for public announcement and will ensure that all
                coordination and suspense dates are met.

                3.2.2.2 Congressional Notification. In accordance with DLA guidance, DES will
                coordinate with J-75 and Legislative Affairs for notification of public
                announcement to Congress one-day prior to public announcement. Press
                packages and sample questions and answers can be developed by the Activity
                Under Competition (AUC) to assist with local notifications. Congressional
                notifications must be concurrent to or precede union notifications and are sent to



JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                the Congressional offices in Washington, DC, the affected district offices, and the
                Chairmen of the Defense Committees.

                3.2.2.3 Notification of Unions, Employees, and other Stakeholders. DES will
                assist HQ DLA in coordination for all congressional, DOD, press, and all relevant
                union notifications (including, but not limited to, American Federation of
                Government Employees (AFGE)). Notification of unions, employees, and the
                public will take place as soon as possible after public announcement as this will
                significantly reduce the chances of any premature, incorrect, or otherwise
                inappropriate information being released from unofficial sources. Therefore, it is
                most prudent to announce the competition publicly the day after sending the
                congressional notifications. It is a good idea for the AUC to meet with the
                affected workforce shortly after the formal congressional notification. However,
                before any all-hands or other meetings with affected employees occur, the AUC
                should meet with all appropriate local union representatives to discuss potential
                effects of the A-76 competition on employees. Any local public notification of an
                A-76 competition must be coordinated with the local PAO and DLA HQ PAO
                staff.

    3.3 Competition Phase Communication: Communication planning during the competition
phase must provide for continuous communications/interactions with the affected workforce.
This includes, but is not limited to, workforce briefings, monthly meetings, website information
(e.g., posting of Frequently Asked Questions), an internal Newsletter, and local TV/
radio/newspaper coverage to inform the public and those affected by the competition. Union
participation also offers the opportunity to consider employee feedback in the A-76 process. The
AUC is responsible for ensuring open communication with employees, their representatives,
affected Inter-Service Support Agreement (ISSA) providers, the local community, and the
Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Most Efficient Organization (MEO) Management Plan
Teams during the competition.

       3.3.1 Once the AUC and the Requiring Activity (RA) have reached consensus on the
approach, the AUC can convene the first all-hands meeting. The AUC will provide employees
with the initial notification of competition, the scope of the competition, milestones/target dates,
and any other information deemed appropriate by the PWS Team Leader, in coordination with
the Contracting Officer and the RA CAPO.

         3.3.2 Employee Communications during PWS and MEO development: The leadership
of the AUC (or its designee) is required to provide updates to the civilian employees who will be
included in the competition and to consider their views on the development and preparation of
the PWS and the MEO (as required by 10 U.S.C. § 2467). These updates and consultations must
take place, at least monthly, during development and preparation of the PWS and the MEO
Management Plan. The monthly consultation must be face-to-face if requested by the
organization‘s representative (e.g., union). Where employees are represented by a labor
organization accorded exclusive recognition under 5 U.S.C. § 7111, the consultation requirement
is satisfied by consultation with representatives of that labor organization.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                3.3.2.1 Generally, the competition phase should be considered as three separate
                timelines: Public Announcement to Final Solicitation Release; Solicitation
                Release through Closing of the Solicitation; and Close of the Solicitation through
                Performance Decision. During each period, various competition teams will act as
                the lead communicators with the DES workforce.

                       3.3.2.1.1 Public Announcement to Final Solicitation Release.
                             3.3.2.1.1.1 During this phase, the RA CAPO will provide
                             supervision to the PWS Team Leader. The PWS Team Leader, or
                             another designee, will ensure that the DES workforce is informed on
                             the progress of creating the PWS and any other pertinent
                             information. Employees should be given the opportunity to review
                             and comment on the PWS.
                             3.3.2.1.1.2 During formation of the PWS, the PWS Team Leader and
                             DSCC-DR will release a Draft PWS for comment.                      The
                             announcement of the release will be posted on www.Fedbizopps.com
                             and the Draft PWS will be posted on www.supply.dla.mil. During
                             this phase, comments will be routed directed to the contracting
                             officer listed in the public announcement (synopsis).         RFIs are
                             generally accepted during periods in which the PWS is in draft form,
                             posted for review, and is open for comment. Once the draft PWS is
                             taken off the www.supply.dla.mil website, the RFI period is closed.
                             3.3.2.1.1.3 During formation of the PWS, the PWS Team Leader and
                             members should establish an open line of communications with the
                             local contracting shop. Interaction amongst the PWS Team, DSCC-
                             DR, and local contracting shops is required to ensure that SPs with
                             current contracts within the proposed scope are appropriately
                             informed and that measures are taken in advance to prepare for
                             termination or not exercising option years.
                       3.3.2.1.2 Solicitation Release through Closing of the Solicitation.
                             3.3.2.1.2.1 During this phase, the RA CAPO will provide
                             supervision to the MEO Team Leader, only as it relates to ensuring
                             the minimum communications standards are met. The MEO Team
                             Leader, or another designee, will ensure that the affected DES
                             workforce is informed on the progress of creating the MEO
                             Management Plan and any other pertinent information. Affected
                             employees at all sites under study should be given the opportunity to
                             review and comment on the MEO Management Plan.
                             3.3.2.1.2.2 In some cases, RFIs may also be submitted by
                             offerors/potential SPs after the release of the solicitation. RFIs will
                             only be accepted by bidders at this point, so, affected personnel may
                             not submit individual RFIs. If affected employees have valid RFIs,
                             they should be submitted to the MEO Team, then the ATO for
                             routing to the KO. In these instances, only the A-76 KO may
                             receive the RFI and will determine an appropriate
                             response/mechanism for the response. All information changes at



JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                             this point in the process must be shared with all potential bidders, to
                             include the Agency Tender/MEO.
                       3.3.2.1.3 Close of the Solicitation through Performance Decision (Source
                       Selection Phase).
                             3.3.2.1.3.1 During this phase, the communication plan will become
                             more complicated than in previous phases. The majority of
                             information regarding timelines, discussions, and decisions dealing
                             with source selection are procurement sensitive and CAN NOT be
                             released to any offeror. Since members of the MEO are part of the
                             workforce, general workforce correspondence may not address these
                             issues.
                             3.3.2.1.3.2 During this phase, the Chair of the Source Selection
                             Advisory Council (SSAC), the KO, and the RA CAPO should work
                             together to provide updates, ensuring not to release information that
                             might be procurement sensitive.

                3.3.2.2 The AUC should provide employees with updated milestones, target dates,
                and status of the competition.         Directly affected employees and their
                representatives should be given the opportunity to review and comment on the
                PWS prior to release of the solicitation. To avoid allegations of noncompliance
                with this statutory requirement, the AUC should summarize the results of each
                monthly meeting in a brief memorandum for record, forward copies to
                employees‘ representatives, and post copies in the workplace.

                3.3.2.3 The AUC is responsible for ensuring open communication with
                employees, their representatives, affected public reimbursable providers, the local
                community, and the PWS and MEO teams during the competition. Once they are
                notified of the competition, affected unions may propose one or more methods of
                communicating with employees during the competition process, and these should
                be negotiated between the AUC and the affected union with the assistance of the
                Human Resources Office (HRO).

        3.3.3   Performance Decision.

                3.3.3.1 At or following completion of the standard competition form for a
                standard competition, an announcement of the competition decision is made, to
                include the start date, and duration of the public review and contest period to the
                employees. In the case of an initial performance decision, the HQ DLA
                Legislative Affairs (DL) must notify Congress at least one day before the
                Commander or designee notifies the workforce.

                3.3.3.2 At the conclusion of the contest period, the AUC or designee announces
                the final decision to the employees. In the case of a final contract decision (and,
                therefore, a contract/Letter of Obligation (LOO) award), DL must notify Congress
                before the AUC notifies the employees. Decisions on each appeal will be
                provided to all offerors and the Government‘s MEO. While the employees are



JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                being notified, the Contracting Officer (KO) must notify all bidders/offerors of
                the final contract decision. Once these notifications are complete, the PAO
                should notify the local media.

    3.4 Customer Communications.

        3.4.1 General. Customers should be provided with relevant and timely information
about the upcoming and/or on-going competition. This communication should begin as early as
possible, but certainly before issuance of the request for proposals. When accomplished early,
such communication can create an opportunity to gain customers‘ buy-in to the process, gain
their commitment to providing input on the performance requirements, and provide personnel to
assist with evaluation of offers. Customers must be kept informed of the A-76 competition‘s
potential impacts on their relationship with DES or the services that they depend on DES to
provide. During the planning stage, the AUC and the RA CA Program Manager should plan a
series of meetings with a variety of levels of management within DES and their major customers.
DLA HQ customer service representatives should be given the opportunity to review the
communications plan and to participate in the meetings with customers. The initial meetings
should be conducted with senior-level management to provide an overview of the functions to be
studied, efforts to ensure continued mission accomplishment during and after the competition,
and any proposed impacts. When relevant, current public reimbursable providers should be
notified of the upcoming competition.

        3.4.2   Key participants in Customer Communications.

                3.4.2.1 DES Site Leadership Teams. DES Site Directors and their staff play a
                crucial role in effective communications with DLA Customers. Site Directors act
                as the eyes, ears, and mouths of the RA and AUC, and should ensure that monthly
                (or periodic) meetings are conducted between elements of the AUC and all
                customers.

                3.4.2.2 Customers. Generally, the customer awareness process could consist of
                briefings and meetings at various levels. In addition to the initial meeting
                informing customers of the competition, subsequent meetings should be held with
                the AUC and key individuals, such as the PWS team leader, to ensure that
                customers have been informed of the goals, objectives, strategy, and methodology
                for A-76 competition. Roles and responsibilities should be outlined along with
                instructions for proper disclosure of data among team members (e.g., who can
                discuss what and with whom). Customers should be encouraged to provide input
                on performance requirements. Even more important, they should be made aware
                of the purpose and the timing of the competition and the potential changes in the
                way they will receive services.

                3.4.2.3 DLA General Counsel. Legal counsel should explain to PWS team
                members any pitfalls involving disclosure of sensitive information during the
                A-76 competition. In addition, if there is a large number or a broad variety of
                customers or if the A-76 competition may result in large-scale changes to the way



JULY 20, 2011                                                                           APPENDIX
APPENDIX S―SAMPLE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN


                the customer is accustomed to receive service, RAs should consider developing a
                separate customer awareness or customer communications plan.

                3.4.2.4 Source Selection Authority (SSA). The SSA, or Chair of the SSAC,
                should consider soliciting a primary customer representative to serve on the
                Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Customers may include both
                external and internal (DLA) individuals and activities.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                         APPENDIX
APPENDIX T―POST AWARD ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW


                                              T APPENDIX T—POST AWARD
                                               ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW

                             (To be inserted upon completion.)




JULY 20, 2011                                                           APPENDIX
 APPENDIX U―SAMPLE RIF NOTIFICATION SCHEDULE


                                            U APPENDIX U— SAMPLE RIF NOTIFICATION
                                                         SCHEDULE

     Notes:
     1. This sample is from a past competition and is for reference only.
     2. When creating this schedule, specific individuals from each activity should be assigned
         to each task.
     3. Samples of Congressional and Union Notification Letters (including RIF Notifications)
         are available in Appendix M
     4. Samples of Media (Press) Releases are available in Appendix L
     5. A template for FEDBIZOPPS Notification is available in Appendix N


     Contact/Action          Responsibility        DATE      Time   Comments

                                                                    No appeals received for the
     Closing Date for
1                           KO/DG                 9/28/06          Administrative Appeal Authority‘s
     Receipt of Contests
                                                                    review

                             ACA if contests                        No contests received  final decision is
2   Final Decision          received; N/A if no   9/29/06          automatic the day following the closing
                             contests received                      date per OSD Guidance.

     Prepare J-3 Note for
3                           J-75                  10/3/06   1300   See Step # 4
     Director‘s Stand-up

     Notify D and DV on
     final decision &
4                           J-3                   10/4/06          Notify at Stand-Up with Director
     pending RIF letter
     issuance

                                                                    Coordinate with DDC-GC; forward to
5   Draft RIF Letters       DHRC-N                10/5/06
                                                                    DHRC for preparation

     Complete Summary                                               Coordinate with DDC, DES J-75, DG,
6                           DP                    10/5/06   1700
     Level Press Release                                            & DL

     Fax Press Release to
7   Congressional           DL                    10/6/06   0900   Obtain press release from DP
     Delegation

     Notify Housing &
     Competitive Sourcing                                           Forward copy of press release to H&CS
8                           J-75                  10/6/06   0900
     on Press Release &                                             (OSD)
     Final Decision Result

     Issue Press Releases                                           Wire/Internet/Fax; 1400 Pacific
9                           DP                    10/6/06   1700
     (National and Local)                                           Standard Time

10   Notify DDJC PAO         DDC Command
                                                   10/6/06   1700   Fax; 1400 Pacific Standard Time
    (Send Press Release)    Affairs




 JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
 APPENDIX U―SAMPLE RIF NOTIFICATION SCHEDULE




     Contact/Action            Responsibility   DATE       Time   Comments

11   Issue FEDBIZOPPS
                               KO               10/6/06    1700   Posted on October 12, 2006.
    Notification

     DDC/DHRC-N
     provides updated data
     for the Congressional                                        Provide updated data as of September
12                             DHRC-N           10/6/06
     Notification letters &                                       30th to J-75
     RIF Notification
     talking paper

     Update DLA A-76
                                                                  October 9 is a federal holiday
13   Library & Directory       J-75             10/10/06   1700
                                                                  (Columbus Day)
     Web Site

14   Schedule phone call
                                                 ASAP             (See Step 19)
    time to ADUSD-SCI

     Draft RIF Notification                                       Coordinate with DDC, DHRC-N, and J-
15                             J-75             10/10/06
     Talking Paper                                                8

     Draft Congressional
                                                                  Coordinate with DDC, DES, DG, DL,
16   Notification Letters on   J-75             10/10/06
                                                                  and DP
     RIF Letter Issuance

17   Finalize RIF Letters      DHRC-N           10/12/06

     Complete RIF
18   Notification Talking      J-75             10/17/06   1700
     Paper

     Advise ADUSD-SCI of
19   final decision and RIF    J-7              10/19/06   0800
     Letter Issuance

     Complete                                                     Obtain DDC, DES, DG, DL, & DP
20   Congressional             J-75             10/19/06   1200   coordination and submit for J-7
     Notification Letters                                         signature

     Begin Congressional
21   Notification on RIF       DL               10/23/06   0900   Notify by phone/fax
     Letter Issuance

     Notify Local
     Legislative               DDC Command                        Fax copies of Congressional RIF
22                                              10/23/06   1000
     Representatives on RIF    Affairs                            notification letters; 0700 Pacific Time
     Letter Issuance

     Issue Official RIF                                           0800 Pacific Time; DHRC-N team on
23                             DHRC-N           10/23/06   1100
     Letters                                                      site at DDJC




 JULY 20, 2011                                                                              APPENDIX
 APPENDIX U―SAMPLE RIF NOTIFICATION SCHEDULE




     Contact/Action           Responsibility      DATE       Time   Comments

     Hold Post-Award
     Conference with the      DSCC-DR / DDJC      Week of
24
     NANA Services, LLP       Commander           10/23/06
     and DDJC CGA

     Complete                                                       DDC requires 120+7 days min to allow
25                            DDC-J3/4 / DHRC-N   2/28/07
     Transition/Conduct RIF                                         for RIF notification to employees.




 JULY 20, 2011                                                                             APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS




                                                     V APPENDIX V— DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN
                                                          REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


HPO Plan Requirements: Mission Performance

    Describe how the mission of the organization is communicated to all employees in the organization.

    Customer Service:                        Describe your customer service plan and how customer service is integrated into the mission/vision of the
                                             organization.
                                             Describe your customer feedback mechanism and how you tailor your product/services to the needs of your
                                             customer.
                                             Provide copies of recent customer feedback and/or survey results documenting level of customer satisfaction.

    Quality Control & Performance            MEO: Provide a crosswalk of required Acceptable Performance Levels (APLs) and achieved percentage.
    Measurement                              Describe deficiencies and the action plan for correction.

                                             Non-MEO: Provide a crosswalk of performance and resource metrics and achieved results. Describe how
                                             the quality of your products and/or services are measured and how the results are integrated into your
                                             mission. Describe deficiencies and the action plan for correction.
    Innovation                               Describe how continuous improvement is promoted and rewarded within the organization to ensure the
                                             organization continues to strive for ―world class‖ performance.

                                             Describe any unique partnerships including public-private partnerships, inter-service agreements, or cross-
                                             functional teams that demonstrate the organization‘s commitment to innovation.
                                             Describe how the organization uses best practices and/or benchmarking.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                            APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS




JULY 20, 2011                                                          APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


HPO Plan Requirements: Human Resources

    Describe the method for measuring employee satisfaction and provide copies of recent employee feedback and/or survey results documenting level of
    employee satisfaction

    Personnel Management                     Describe how your performance management system (standard government pipeline) integrates with your
                                             mission and customer satisfaction goals. Describe award and recognition programs that reward significant
                                             contributions to the organizational goals.

    Employee Development                     Describe workforce planning initiatives and how the organization fosters employee development and
                                             innovation. Include a discussion on any unique training components.

    Workplace Satisfaction                   Describe any unique safety or quality of workplace initiatives that demonstrate the organization‘s
                                             commitment to employee health and safety.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                           APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


HPO Plan Requirements: Cost Analysis
    Describe the process for ensuring resources (staff and $) are aligned to support achievement of organizational goals
    Describe how your financial management systems have been designed/reengineered and undergo continuous improvement to ensure that decision-
    makers have accurate, timely, and useful information and users are able to efficiently and effectively update information.
    Describe how current costs were maintained or reduced in comparison to the previous year/performance period.

    Provide a detailed description of any planned increases/reductions for the next year/performance period and collateral impact on the organization‘s
    performance.

    MEO                                        If workload increased post-decision, describe how the organization was able to accommodate the new
                                               /increased requirements and integrated new budget amounts to meet mission requirements.
                                               If workload decreased post-decision, describe how the organization addressed the reduced requirements and
                                               integrated any changes to budget amounts to meet mission requirements.
    Non - MEO                                  Submit a detailed cost analysis and narrative detailing savings realized from recent BPR related activities.


                                               If workload increased post BPR implementation, describe how the organization was able to accommodate the
                                               new/increased requirements and integrated new budget amounts to meet mission requirements.
                                               If workload decreased post BPR implementation, describe how the organization addressed the reduced
                                               requirements and integrated any changes to budget amounts to meet mission requirements.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                              APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


HPO Evaluation Criteria: Mission Performance
                       Satisfactory:                        Very Good:                                         Excellent:
Customer               - Feedback mechanism in place.       Criteria for Satisfactory plus:                    Criteria for Very Good plus:
Service/Satisfaction   -Customer service tied to            - Demonstration of tailored products/services to   -Documented
                       Mission/Vision                       customer needs                                     recognition/achievement in
                                                                                                               Customer Service or Customer
                                                                                                               Recommendation

Quality                NON-MEO:                             Criteria for Satisfactory plus:                    Criteria for Very Good plus:
Control/Performance    - Quality Control Program            NON-MEO:                                           NON-MEO:
Measurement            implemented and used as an           -Performance Management system tied to QC          Criteria for Very Good plus:
                       objective measure of performance     programs                                           -Recognition for outstanding
                       - Achieves 85% of its required                                                          quality (internal or external)
                       performance metrics.
                       MEO:                                 Criteria for Satisfactory plus:                    Criteria for Very Good plus:
                       - QC/CSP implemented and used        MEO:                                               MEO:
                       as the MEO‘s objective measure       - Achieves a cumulative 90% of its APLs            -Achieves a cumulative 95% of its
                       of performance and first line of     Service Provider‘s performance of tasks is         APLs. Service Provider‘s
                       quality in the organization          consistently above standard and provides           performance of virtually all tasks is
                       - Achieves 85 % of the total APLs    tangible and intangible benefits to the            consistently noteworthy and
                       contained in the PWS. MEO            Government. Although some areas may require        provides numerous significant,
                       performance of PWS tasks is          improvement; these areas are minor and are         tangible or intangible, benefits to
                       adequate with some tangible          more than offset by better performance in other    the Government. There are no
                       benefits to the Government.          areas. Few, if any, recurring problems have        recurring problems.
                       Although there are areas of good     been noted.
                       or better performance, these are
                       more or less offset by lower-rated
                       performance.
                       - Achieves satisfactory
                       performance of MEO Letter of
                       Obligation requirements 85% of
                       the time as documented in the
                       CGA‘s implementation of the
                       QASP.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                     APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


Demonstration of     - Has demonstrated past process   Criteria for Satisfactory plus:                 Criteria for Very Good plus:
Innovation.          improvement/innovation.           -Has documented/planned for future process      -Currently uses best practices and
                                                       improvements/innovations                        unique partnerships to fulfill
                                                                                                       mission requirements or create
                                                                                                       efficiencies.
                                                       NON-MEO:                                        MEO:
                                                       -Has successfully reinvested savings and        Meets the binding performance
                                                       demonstrated strategic focus on innovation.     agreement to realize additional
                                                                                                       savings percentages over the
                                                                                                       average cost of performing the
                                                                                                       function during the previous year
                                                                                                       and has applied savings to
                                                                                                       continued process improvements
                                                                                                       and staff development.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                               APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


HPO Evaluation Criteria: Human Resources

                        Satisfactory:          Very Good:                  Excellent:
Employee Development/   - System in place to   Criteria for Satisfactory   Criteria for Very Good plus:
Satisfaction            measure employee       plus:                       -Demonstrated dedication to employee friendly
                        satisfaction           -Documentation that         workplace (i.e. flex time, health/safety initiatives,
                                               overall employee            work/life balance)
                                               satisfaction meets
                                               acceptable levels (>50%)

Personnel Management                           Criteria for Satisfactory   Criteria for Very Good plus:
                        -Performance           plus:                       - Demonstration of dedication to employee training
                        management system      - Performance               and professional development.
                        in place.              Management System
                                               clearly linked to mission
                                               and customer
                                               satisfaction.
                                               - Workforce appropriate
                                               to mission
                                               accomplishment.
                        MEO:                   Criteria for Satisfactory
                        -MEO has maintained    plus:
                        awarded personnel      MEO:
                        numbers.               -If applicable: MEO has
                                               experienced
                                               decrease/increase in
                                               workload and has
                                               correctly adjusted
                                               personnel numbers to
                                               meet mission
                                               requirements and budget
                                               constraints.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                 APPENDIX
APPENDIX V―DLA HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS


HPO Evaluation Criteria: Cost Analysis

                             Satisfactory:                                 Very Good:                                                 Excellent:
Non-MEO                      -Financial Management system in place.        Satisfactory Criteria plus:                                Criteria for Very Good plus:
                                                                           -Demonstration of system use by managers and               -Financial Management system
                                                                           accuracy of information.                                   tied to Performance
                                                                                                                                      Management and Quality
                                                                                                                                      Control Systems
                                                                                                                                      -Provides clear concise,
                                                                                                                                      actionable plan for increased
                                                                                                                                      efficiencies/cost savings in up
                                                                                                                                      coming year/performance
                                                                                                                                      period.
                                                                           Organization has demonstrated savings post BPR             Realized savings post-BPR
                                                                           implementation. (Savings is calculated in COMPARE          achieved 20% savings or
                                                                           using the SLCF. Pre-BPR cost are calculated in Lines       greater.
                                                                           1-4, Post-BPR cost will be calculated in Lines 1a-
                                                                           4a)

MEO                          - Past period end actual costs, less saved    Criteria for Satisfactory plus:                            Criteria for Very Good plus:
                             pay, do not exceed the total In-House         -Cost comparison shows increased efficiency from           - Provides clear concise,
                             Cost Estimate (ACE) (adjusted for             prior to current year/period of performance.               actionable plan for increased
                             inflation and PWS changes)                                                                               efficiencies/cost savings in up
                                                                                                                                      coming year/performance
                                                                           (Savings is calculated in COMPARE using the SLCF           period.
                                                                           or SCF. Original ACE costs are calculated in Lines 1-
                                                                           5, Current MEO costs will be calculated in Lines 1a-
                                                                           5a)




 The DLA Contracting Center for Excellence will perform COMPARE calculations, and provide results and estimated savings to the DLA HPO Board prior to determination.




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                  APPENDIX
APPENDIX W―PERFORMANCE METRICS DASHBOARDS



                                  W APPENDIX W PERFORMANCE METRICS DASHBOARDS


                                      DDOO Performance Metrics Dashboard
                                  Study Start Date: 02/04/05                     Study Finish Date: 08/04/06 (Projected)

                                                                - On schedule, no slippages or delays in schedule
                                       Schedule       G       - Caution: some internal slippage on tasks, and potential to affect major milestones
                                                               - Action Required: Competition in danger of extending past statutory time limit
                Performance
                   Rating                                       - Performing to plan, +/- 10% vs. Plan
                                                               - Caution: areas where costs are 10-20% above Plan during Period; Team Lead
                                         Cost         G             should investigate to understand nature of variance
                                                               - Incurring costs > 20% above plan during Period. Actions required

                                                       •   Announced Feb 4, 2005
                                                       •   Reviewing GFE records
                                       Current
                                      Milestones       •   Updating workload reports with 1st Qtr FY05 data
                                                       •   Reviewing PWS and TE’s
                 Milestones                            •   PWS Review Meeting Held March 22-24


                                      Upcoming
                                                       •   Issue draft RFP April 22, 2005
                                      Milestones


                                                       •   Step 1 - Scoping -- 100% Completed
                                                       •   Step 2 - Grouping -- 100% Completed
                                                       •   Step 3 - Workload Data Collection & Systems -- 100% Completed
                                      Preliminary      •   Step 4 - Baseline Costs -- 100% Completed
                 Key Points
                                       Planning        •   Step 5 - Type of Competition -- 100% Completed
                                                       •   Step 6 - Schedule -- 100% Completed
                                                       •   Step 7/8 - Competition Roles -- 100% Completed
                                                       •   Step 9 - Notify Incumbent Service Providers -- 100% Completed

                 Changes/
                  Actions         •      Assess impact of DLA Independent Assessment
                 Required
          Updates as of 3/31/05




JULY 20, 2011                                                                                                 APPENDIX
APPENDIX W―PERFORMANCE METRICS DASHBOARDS




JULY 20, 2011                               APPENDIX
APPENDIX W―PERFORMANCE METRICS DASHBOARDS




                                Performance Measure Dashboard
                                        Study Start Date:           Study Finish Date:

                                              - On schedule:
                           Schedule     G   - Caution:
                                             - Action Required:
       Performance
          Rating
                                              -
                             Cost       G   -
                                             -


                          Current MEO
                           Milestones


                           Current
                          Acquisition
        Milestones        Milestones



                          Upcoming
                          Milestones



                           Other
        Key Points
                      Issues/Concerns

        Changes/
         Actions
        Required



 Updates as of 05/30/06


JULY 20, 2011                                                                      APPENDIX
APPENDIX W―PERFORMANCE METRICS DASHBOARDS




JULY 20, 2011                               APPENDIX
         APPENDIX X―COST TRACKING SHEET



                               X APPENDIX X COST TRACKING SHEET




Competition Number:                         Office:
Competition Name:                           POC:                             Phone:
Period (month & year):

                                                Cost ($)       Hours           Clarification/Breakdown

Preliminary Planning
Labor
      Requiring Activity (govt)
      Requiring Activity (consultant)
      Activity Under Competition (govt)
      HQ (govt)
  Monthly Preliminary Planning Labor        $              -           0.0
  Cumulative Preliminary Planning Labor

Travel
     Requiring Activity (govt)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     HQ (govt)
  Monthly Preliminary Planning Travel       $              -           0.0
  Cumulative Preliminary Planning Travel

Monthly Preliminary Planning Total          $              -           0.0
Cumulative Preliminary Planning Total

PWS
Labor
     Requiring Activity (govt)
     Requiring Activity (consultant)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     HQ (govt)
  Monthly PWS Labor                         $              -           0.0
  Cumulative PWS Labor

Travel
     Requiring Activity (govt)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     HQ (govt)
  Monthly PWS Travel                        $              -           0.0
  Cumulative PWS Travel

Monthly PWS Total                           $              -           0.0
Cumulative PWS Total

MEO

         JULY 20, 2011                                                                   APPENDIX
         APPENDIX X―COST TRACKING SHEET


Labor
     Requiring Activity (govt)
     Requiring Activity (consultant)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     IRO (govt)
     IRO (consultant)
     DORRA (govt)
  Monthly MEO Labor                             $   -   0.0
  Cumulative MEO Labor

Travel
     Requiring Activity (govt)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     IRO (govt)
     IRO (consultant)
     DORRA (govt)
  Monthly MEO Travel                            $   -   0.0
  Cumulative MEO Travel

Monthly MEO Total                               $   -   0.0
Cumulative MEO Total

Acquisition Support
Labor
      Acquisition Preliminary Planning (Govt)
      Solicitation Labor (govt)
  Monthly Acquisition Support Labor             $   -   0.0
  Cumulative Acquisition Support Labor

Travel
     KO (govt)
     Evaluation Boards (govt)
  Monthly Acquisition Support Travel            $   -   0.0
  Cumulative Acquisition Support Travel

Monthly Acquisition Support Total               $   -   0.0
Cumulative Acquisition Support Total

Other
Labor
Travel
Purchase Services

Monthly Other Total                             $   -   0.0
Cumulative Other Total

Transition
Labor


         JULY 20, 2011                                        APPENDIX
         APPENDIX X―COST TRACKING SHEET


     Requiring Activity (govt)
     CLSS (Combat Logistics Support Sqd.)
     Requiring Activity (consultant)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     HQ (govt)
  Monthly Transition Labor                            $   -   0.0
  Cumulative Transition Labor

Travel
     Requiring Activity (govt)
     Activity Under Competition (govt)
     HQ (govt)
  Monthly Transition Travel                           $   -   0.0
  Cumulative Transition Travel

Monthly Transition Total                              $   -   0.0
Cumulative Transition Total

TOTAL MONTHLY COSTS                                   $   -   0.0
TOTAL CUMULATIVE COSTS



Note 1: Confirm with Requiring Activity competition
leads and send to DLA J-75 by the end of the first
week of each month

Note 2: Monthly cost reports are based on the
previous month's costs (Example: Costs for January
2006 would be due to J-75 by the end of the first
week of March 2006)




         JULY 20, 2011                                              APPENDIX
APPENDIX Y―REFERENCES



                             Y APPENDIX Y REFERENCES


Regulations/Policies/Manuals:

•   Defense Logistics Acquisition Directive 4105.1 (DLAD 4105.1), DLA Acquisition of
    Supplies and Services, May 11, 2000.
•   Defense Logistics Agency Independent Review Handbook for A-76 Studies, 2002
•   Defense Logistics Agency Regulation, DLA Freedom of Information Act Program , March
    13, 1992
•   Department of Defense A-76 Costing Manual (DODI) 4100.33, March 15, 2001
•   Department of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations, Subpart 215.3 (DFARS 215.3),
    Source Selection, June 27, 2000
•   Department of Defense, COMPARE User’s Guide, July 2, 2003.
•   Department of Defense, Guidebook for Performance-Based Acquisition in the Department of
    Defense, December 2000
•   Department of Defense, Joint Ethics Regulation (JER)5500.7-R, 30 Aug 93. Change 4,
    effective 6 August 1998
•   Department of Defense, OSD Guide to Inventory Submission, November 2002.
•   Government Accountability Office (GAO), Jones/Hill Decision of 2002.
•   General Services Administration, Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)
•   National Defense Authorization Act Fiscal Year 2004, Sec 337 (NDAA FY04)
•   Office of Management and Budget (OMB,) Circular A-76 dated May 29, 2003.
•   Office of Management and Budget, The Competition in Contracting Act, March 2002
•   United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 32, Part 169a 17 (32 CFR 169a 17),
    National Defense: Commercial Activities Program, July 01, 1999
•   United States Code Title 05, Section 522, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 1974
•   United States Code Title 05, Section 7103 (5 U.S.C. § 7103) Government Organization and
    Employees-Labor Management Relations: Definitions, Applications, January 06, 2003
•   United States Code Title 05, Section 7111 (5 U.S.C. § 7111) Government Organization and
    Employees-Rights and Duties of Agencies and Labor Organizations, January 06, 2003.
•   United States Code Title 10, Section 2305(g) (10 U.S.C. § 2305), Armed Services
    Procurement- Contracts: Planning, Solicitation, Evaluation, and Award Procedures, January
    22, 2002
•   United States Code Title 10, Section 2461 (10 U.S.C. § 2461), Armed Forces Procurement-
    Contracts: Commercial or Industrial Type Functions-Required Studies and Reports Before
    Conversion to Contractor Performance, January 22, 2002
•   United States Code Title 10, Section 2467 (10 U.S.C. § 2467), Armed Forces Procurement-
    Contracts: Commercial or Industrial Type Functions Cost Comparisons-Consultation with
    Employees, January 22, 2002
•   United States Code Title 18, Section 1001 (18 U.S.C. § 1001), Crimes and Criminal
    Procedures- Statements or Entries Generally, January 22, 2002
•   United States Code Title 41, Section 423 (41 U.S.C. § 423), Public Contracts- Restrictions
    on Disclosing and Obtaining Contractor Bid or Proposal Information or Source Selection
    Information, January 22, 2002


JULY 20, 2011                                                                         APPENDIX
APPENDIX Y―REFERENCES


Web Sites:

•   COMPARE Web site: http://comparea76.com
•   DLA A-76 home page: http://www.dla.mil/j-3/A-76/A-76Main.html
•   DOD FAIRNet Web portal: http://web.lmi.org/fairnet/
•   FedBizOps: http://www.fedbizopps.gov/
•   OPM Pay Tables: http://www.opm.gov/oca/payrates/index.html
•   SHARE A-76: http://sharea76.fedworx.org/sharea76/Home.aspx
•   DLA A-76 Contracting Support Office: http://www.supply.dla.mil/A76




JULY 20, 2011                                                            APPENDIX

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:16
posted:7/20/2011
language:English
pages:227
Description: Public Disclosure Bco 23 document sample