PBR_Pitfalls_and_Best_Practices_VAFB_Site_Visit_15Oct12.pptx
PPTX presentation 775 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Vandenberg Air Force Base (AFB) Performance-Based Remediation (PBR) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8903-12-R-0033
About this file
Pitfalls and Best Practices PowerPoint Briefing from the Vandenberg PBR Site Visit.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 45
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Performance Based Remediation Contractor Pitfalls and Best Practices 15 October 2012 Vandenberg AFB Group Site Visit
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force
Overview Definitions/Terms Consistency in Details Other Observations Best Practices for Integrated Master Schedules/Milestone Payment Schedules
Please read the specific RFP that you are proposing on carefully. If there is uncertainty on a definition or any aspect of the RFP, please ask the CO.
Definitions/Terms (cont.)
Site Closeout (SC) – signifies when the Air Force (AF) has completed all active management and monitoring at an environmental cleanup site, no additional environmental cleanup funds will be expended at the site and the AF has obtained regulatory concurrence.
For practical purposes, SC occurs when cleanup goals have been achieved that allow unrestricted use of the property (i.e., no further Long Term Management (LTM), including institutional controls, is required) and that all site decommissioning has been completed.
Pitfall Examples:
Regulatory closure may not equal SC.
No Further Action (NFA) and/or No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) may not equal unrestricted use.
Simple requirements such as signage or five-year reviews required to ensure protectiveness even if no monitoring is required is equivalent to LTM – therefore when these are required, the site is at RC vs. SC.
Remedy in Place (RIP) –when a final remedial action, approved by the USAF has been installed or active remediation initiated at the site and has been verified to be operating properly and successfully.
Response Complete (RC) –The milestone marking the achievement of all remedial action objectives of the final DD and the termination of Remedial Action Operations (RA-O).
Pitfall examples:
A site in Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) that has not achieved target levels would be in RIP.
Once target levels are reached and monitoring is required to ensure protectiveness is maintained (i.e., verification of no rebound), it would be RC.
A site implementing an interim remedy (i.e. not pursuant to a signed Decision Document or DD) does not satisfy the definition of RIP or RC.
Performance indicators, decision criteria, and performance models - used to optimize remedial efficiency, assess how the response is progressing and demonstrate when the objective has been reached.
Pitfall examples:
Metrics for percentage of time operational provide limited value without also considering effectiveness of the system toward achieving the objectives during that operational period.
Meeting minutes that document activities without demonstrated achievement of objectives are not a good metric for performance payment.
Statements that “we will actively work with the regulators” do not convey what is being accomplished or how that will alleviate the issue.
OES based on status quo without rationale to support provide limited value without indicating why the current operation(s) represent the lowest cost possible under conditions.
Notice to Proceed (NTP) Table 1 of the SOO establishes the timeframe for completion of performance objectives and often expresses using a duration from NTP.
NTP for purposes of Table 1 of the SOO is equal to the date of the contract award for a Sub-CLIN, unless expressly stated otherwise by the Contracting Officer.
Pitfall examples:
NTP for construction activities upon demonstration of bonding and NTP for purposes of Table 1 of the SOO are not the same.
Consistency in Details Integrated Master Schedule/Milestone Payment Schedule (IMS/MPS) consistency with the proposed remedial approach to achieve the performance objective
Pitfall examples:
Deliverables inconsistent with end state definitions A milestone for achievement of RIP prior to demonstration of operating properly and successfully.
Unclear understanding of relationships of Federal and State oversight agencies relative to deliverables and adherence with agreements (e.g. Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA), Corrective Action Permits, etc.)
Timeframes for regulatory review that are not aligned with the FFA.
Deliverables inconsistent with regulations relative to the approach Explanation of Significant Differences or Record of Decision Amendment not included.
Inclusion of a DD without the proposed plan and public comment period.
Other Observations Do not act or depend on Industry Day briefings/information; only criteria to follow for a specific acquisition is that RFP.
Do not assume evaluators are familiar with installation(s), sites or proposed remedies.
Contractor changes in Technical Approach mid-stream do not require contract modifications in the PBR construct (i.e. contracted for end objective versus how to get there). However, MPS re-negotiation is necessary.
Cash flow as defined by contractors and the Air Force differs Contractors = date at which the milestone payment is received and includes the value for only the completed milestone(s).
Air Force = date at which the Sub-CLIN is to be exercised and includes the value of the entire Sub-CLIN.
Best Practices for Integrated Master Schedules (IMSs) When built correctly, the IMS can provide automatic updates used for programmatic planning and oversight:
Build as a hierarchy or Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) in outline levels aligned with the Sub-CLIN numbers, descriptions, and amounts in the awarded contract.
Include negotiated payment milestone amounts per the approved MPS Define predecessor/successor relationships and constraints associated with activities based on Sub-CLIN timing logic.
Include a notice to proceed (NTP) milestone as the first activity for each Sub-CLIN Define start dates of Sub-CLINs with actual or projected NTP dates based on contract award documents.
Record percent complete of activities in the MPS (0% or 100%) based on Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) approval
Illustration of a an Integrated IMS/MPS Well Defined Hierarchy or WBS with NTP milestone Start and Finish Dates Integration of MPS Complete Established Predecessor Relationships
Relating Sub-CLIN Timing Logic to MS Project Predecessors
| CLIN/ SUB-CLIN | CLIN/SUB-CLIN/PAYMENT MILESTONE DESCRIPTION | CLIN/ SUB-CLIN AMOUNT | PROJECTED DATE OF EXERCISE |
| 0001 | ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION FFP of (x AFB) in accordance with the Statement of Objectives | ||
| 0001AA | Preliminary Project Management Plan (PMP) | $38,000 | At Award |
| 0001AB | Final Project Management Plan (PMP) | $25,000 | Approx. 4 years from 0009AA or CO determination of bona fide need |
| 0001AC | CG025 Management Unit: Achieve DD | $60,000 | At Award |
| 0001AD | CG025 Management Unit: Achieve RC in accordance with Table 1 of the SOO (within 2 years from NTP) | $140,000 | Upon completion of 0009AC or CO determination of bona fide need. |
| 0001AE | CG025 Management Unit: Mobilize and develop an optimized exit strategy to achieve SC and implement the elements of the approved strategy that fall within the POP | $50,000 | Upon completion of 0009AD or CO determination of bona fide need. |
| 0001AF | CG025 Management Unit: Finalize optimized exit strategy to achieve SC and implement the elements of the approved strategy that fall within the POP | $25,000 | Approximately 2 years from 0009AE or CO determination of bona fide need. |
| 0001AG | TU/US-C510 – Bldg. 920: Achieve SC in accordance with Table 1 of the SOO (within 4 years from NTP) | $30,000 | 2nd Q FY14 |
Examples of Predecessor/Successor Relationships
Example of Start No Earlier Than Constraint
IMS Predecessor Illustration No predecessors defined between Sub-CLINs Start dates do not correspond to logical execution
Sub-CLIN 0001AC was exercised at Award (9/19/11).
Sub-CLIN 0001AD would follow approximately 1 year later once RFI completed. With no predecessor indicated, delay or acceleration in achievement of 00091C will not “push” the 00091D date.
Sub-CLIN 0001AE should not occur until RC achieved (Spring 2013). If extracted as is, approximately $152,000 would show under FY11 4th Q versus 2nd Q FY14. Also, any delay or acceleration in achievement of 0001AD will not affect 0001AE.
image2.png image3.png image4.png image5.png image6.png image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .