B08_ATT_8_Past_Perf_Questionnaire_AM_0001_0001.pdf
PDF 197 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Federal Orphaned Well Program - P&A Regions 2 & 3 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140L0623R0001
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire template to be completed as part of a response to a federal solicitation. The questionnaire collects information about a contractor's past work on similar contracts, including contract details, reference evaluations, and ratings in areas such as quality, schedule, pricing, management, and regulatory compliance. The related solicitation seeks plugging and abandonment services through multiple awards of an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for orphaned oil and gas wells on federal lands throughout the continental United States. The base period of performance is one year with four additional one-year option periods. Responses are due as specified in solicitation number 140L0623R0001 issued by the Bureau of Land Management National Office for the Federal Orphaned Well Program in regions 2 and 3.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 18
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
A. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
Company Name Street Address City State Zip Code UEI Number Point of Contact
B. CONTRACT INFORMATION
Project Title Contract Number Contract Type Awarded Contract Price Current / Final Price Contract Award Date Contract Completion Date Project Location Client / Owner Brief description of the contract & work effort:
C. REFERENCE:
Name Position / Title Organizati on
Phone Number Email Address Signature
Date
D. EVALUATION
Rating Definition
Exceptional (EX) Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the owner’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
Very Good (VG) Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the owner’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
Satisfactory (S) Performance met contractual requirements. The element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.
Marginal (M) Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective action.
Unsatisfactory (U)
Performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.
Not Applicable
(NA)
The element does not pertain to the subject project as a result of specific contract and/or project requirements.
Evaluation Area Rating Quality Quality of workmanship (including subcontractors)?
Quality of and adherence to quality control plan?
Quality of informational and technical submittals?
Overall Quality Rating Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):
Schedule & Time Management Met project schedule milestones and/or deadlines?
Responded to owner requests in a timely manner?
Informational and technical submittals submitted timely?
Promptly addressed scheduling issues?
Overall Schedule & Time Management Rating
Pricing and Payments Minimized additional costs when addressing differing & unforeseen site conditions?
Provided fair and reasonable pricing for contract modifications?
Submitted accurate and complete invoices?
Promptly paid subcontractors and suppliers?
Overall Pricing and Payment Rating
Management General oversight by project manager and superintendent?
Coordination with and control of subcontractors?
Avoidance of accidents & safety violations?
Addressed location factors (especially remote locations)?
Maintained good working relationship with owner representatives?
Demonstrated flexibility, innovativeness and cooperation in resolving potential problems?
Overall Management Rating
Regulatory Compliance Met local and/or Federal requirements for plugging & abandonment?
Met regulatory and contractual labor standards?
Overall Regulatory Compliance Rating Overall Recommendation:
Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to perform in accordance with the contract’s most significant requirements, I would recommend them for similar contracts:
Overall Comments:
| Text1: |
| Text2: |
| Text3: |
| Text4: |
| Text5: |
| Text6: |
| Text7: |
| Text9: |
| Text10: |
| Text11: |
| Text12: |
| Text13: |
| Text14: |
| Text15: |
| Text17: |
| Text16: |
| Text8: |
| Text18: |
| Text19: |
| Text20: |
| Text21: |
| Text22: |
| Text23: |
| Dropdown11: [ ] |
| Dropdown12: [ ] |
| Dropdown13: [ ] |
| Dropdown10: [ ] |
| Dropdown14: [ ] |
| Dropdown15: [ ] |
| Dropdown16: [ ] |
| Dropdown17: [ ] |
| Text24: |
| Dropdown18: [ ] |
| Dropdown20: [ ] |
| Dropdown21: [ ] |
| Dropdown22: [ ] |
| Text25: |
| Dropdown19: [ ] |
| Dropdown23: [ ] |
| Dropdown24: [ ] |
| Dropdown25: [ ] |
| Dropdown26: [ ] |
| Dropdown27: [ ] |
| Text26: |
| Dropdown29: [ ] |
| Dropdown30: [ ] |
| Dropdown31: [ ] |
| Dropdown32: [ ] |
| Dropdown28: [ ] |
| Dropdown33: [ ] |
| Text27: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .