department of defense handbook guidance for acquisition ... - NAVAIR

MIL-HDBK-29612-1Averification criteria may be cited in the appropriate section of the RFP or contract byinserting additional statements.4.4.6.4 DID tailoring. When procuring data products, it is necessary to determine whichDIDs provide the data product requirements. When the appropriate DIDs have been determined,each should be carefully reviewed to identify the minimum data required. Once the required datahas been identified, the DIDs should be tailored so that only the required data is procured. DIDsare tailored by deletion only. Deletion tailoring is performed by annotating in Block 16 of theCDRL the DID paragraph(s) which are not required. (See MIL-HDBK-245D, Section 5.)Suggestions for tailoring DIDs are provided herein (See Section 5).4.4.6.5 Use of CDRL data. Any data generated and delivered to the Government throughcontract performance must be identified in the CDRL. The CDRL refers to the SOW task thatgenerates the data, and cites the DID needed for data content and format. The CDRL statesnecessary DID tailoring actions, sets the number of deliverable copies and who receives them,and prescribes the delivery media. The CDRL also states the data delivery schedule.4.5 RFP/contract package preparation guidance. The content and format of the RFPpackage is flexible and should only include essential Government requirements. The followingguidance applies to preparation of the package:a. The acquisition/program manager(s) should take part in developing all Sections of theUniform Contract Format (UCF).b. The organization of any RFP package should conform to the UCF or the alternate formsdescribed in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)/Defense Federal AcquisitionRegulation Supplements (DFARS).c. The Standard Form (SF) 33 is used as the RFP cover page and includes provisions forcontract award.d. The RFP/contract package will reflect the adequacy and accuracy of the requirements.Considerable risk may be placed on the Government and contractor when the contractpackage lacks adequate definition of requirements. Packages lacking an integratedGovernment and contractor Quality Assurance (QA) effort, through the IPT process, alsopresent significant risk. Joint quality reviews, as part of the IPT process, are important.A well-written RFP/contract package defines these QA procedures. This, in turn, shouldreduce technical, schedule, and cost risks for both the contractor and the Government.4.5.1 Contract Part I - The Schedule. Figure 2 is provided for general guidance to show theorganization of the sections of the RFP/contract.18