Attachment 0024 - Quality Assurance Surveilance Plan (QASP) - 24NOV2020.pdf

IAMD Program IAMD-00308 (U) Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020

UNCLASSIFIED Use or disclosure of this report is subject to the restriction on the title page.

U.S. ARMY AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND

CONTRACT W31P4Q-08-C-0418 FOR THE

INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE (IAMD)

INTEGRATED FIRES MISSION COMMAND (IFMC)

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Low Rate Initial Production /Full Rate Production

(LRIP/FRP)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Prepared For:

United States Army Program Executive Office for Missiles and Space IAMD Project Office

Prepared By:

IAMD Project Office Performance Management Division

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D. Distribution authorized to the Department of Defense and U.S. DoD contractors only;

Administrative Use, 07 Aug 09. Other requests shall be referred to the Program Executive Office Missiles and Space, Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Project Office, ATTN: SFAE-MSL-IAMD, Bldg. 5250 Martin Road, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898- 5000.

DIRECT MILITARY SUPPORT - EXPORT CONTRACT ACT WARNING REQUIRED.

UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE PROJECT OFFICE, ALL ENGINEERING TECHNICAL DATA, SOFTWARE AND COST DATA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE EXPORT RESTRICTIONS AS FOLLOWS: WARNING - This document contains technical data whose export is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C., Sec 2751 et. Seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended. Title 50, U.S.C., app 2401 et. Seq.

Violation of these export laws are subject to severe criminal penalties. Disseminate in accordance with provisions of DOD Directive 5230.25.

DESTRUCTION NOTICE - For classified documents, follow the procedures in DOD 5200.22-M, National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM), Chapter 5, Section 7, or DOD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program Regulation, Chapter IX. For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020

Approved by: ________________________________ Date: _____________ Mr. Jerome Paul Contracting Officer’s Representative IAMD Project Office

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020

Revision History

Revision Description Date New Initial Release 25 July 2019

1 Revised 22 Nov 2020

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

Table of Contents

1. PURPOSE

2. INTRODUCTION

3. AUTHORITY

4. SCOPE

5. GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND RESOURCES

6. METHODS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE

7. ISSUE RESOLUTION

8. CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CPAR)

9. DOCUMENTATION

10. QASP METHODOLOGY

11. PRODUCT ASSURANCE (PA) MANAGEMENT

12. QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) MANAGEMENT

13. CONTRACTOR METRICS

14. SHIP READINESS REVIEWS (SRR)

15. THIRD PARTY AUDITS OR APPRAISALS

16. IAMD SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT (SCM)

17. DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY (DCMA)

18. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

19. HARDWARE (HW) AND SOFTWARE (SW) TEST FEEDBACK

20. CUSTOMER FEEDBACK

21. ACRONYMS

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to assure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of Contract W31P4Q-08-C-0418, and specifically the Statement of Work (SOW) for the Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) / Full Rate Production (FRP) contract. The intent is to help assure that the contractor performs in accordance with (IAW) the contract’s SOW, that the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract, and that the Government only pays for an acceptable level of service.

Note, HW end items previously referred to as Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS) will now be referred to herein as IFMC.

2. INTRODUCTION

A. The intent of this QASP is to support the efforts as described in the LRIP/FRP SOW. The Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense (AIAMD) Program will deliver a capability that integrates all Air and Missile Defense (AMD) sensors, weapons, and Command and Control (C2) nodes through an Integrated Fire Control Network (IFCN). The goal of this network-centric operation is to use data from any sensor to fire any weapon to defeat threat targets. This Plug and Fight (P&F) capability enables flexible interceptor selection and firing doctrine with available sensor assets within an AMD Task Force (TF). The common C2 requirements allow operational flexibility for the tailoring of AMD TFs to specific missions. The Integrated Fires Mission Command (IFMC)is made up of four components:

Engagement Operations Center (EOC); Integrated Fire Control Network (IFCN) Relay;

IFMC Software, Common Warfighter Machine Interface (CWMI); and Adaptation Kits (A-Kits), Adapts legacy sensors/shooters to the IFCN (Sentinel, PATRIOT, IFPC/Avenger etc.) . The IFCN consists of the transport layer (radios) and associated net management software resident in the IFMC EOC and IFCN Relay. The IFMC Program includes providing support to the IAMD Project Office in the integration of IFMC with IAMD weapon and sensor components through “A-Kits” developed by existing programs of record.

The IAMD architecture consists of the IFMC EOC connected via an IFC and network relays, working in an integrated manner with AMD weapons and sensor components. The IAMD System of System (SoS) capability is incorporated into all Air Defense Artillery (ADA) forces at Army Air and Missile Defense Commands, ADA Brigade Headquarters, Patriot battalions, Sentinel radars, Air Defense and Airspace Management (ADAM) Cells, Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) units, and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) units.

The IFMC also provides common deliverable items that include P&F components (referred to as “B-Kits”) and IFMC Common Software Modules (CSM) that are intended to facilitate the IAMD level integration/testing and future weapon and sensor integration.

Examples of the IFMC LRIP/FRP SOW requirements include:

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020

1) The manufacturing and delivery of EOCs and Relays

2) Providing support to Army Systems of Systems (ASoS) level planning, integration, testing, Contractor Logistic Support, training and requirements verification at IAMD test sites (e.g., White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), Integrated Air Defense Center (IADC), G-SIL, Eglin Air Force Base (AFB), and Yuma Proving Grounds (YPG).

3) Delivering IFCN Relay units that incorporates Plug and Fight components to interface with adapted sensor and weapon components

4) Completing the engineering, logistics, integration, and test activities to incorporate the modified-off-the-shelf Integrated Fire Control Server & Processor (IFCS/IFCP) into the IFMC product baseline

5) Ensuring Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) requirements contained in the System Specification are achieved and verified

6) Provide support for IFMC activities in the System Integration Labs (SILs).

7) Perform First Article Inspections (FAIs), Production Line Validations (PLVs), and

Manufacturing Readiness Assessments (MRAs)

3. AUTHORITY

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 46.4, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the articles, services, and documentation to be called for by the Contracting Officer (KO) or his/her duly authorized representative.

The need for IAMD to develop a QASP is identified in FAR -- Part 37 Service Contracting;

Subpart 37.6 -- Performance-Based Acquisition; 37.604 -- Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans which states: Requirements for quality assurance and quality assurance surveillance plans are in Subpart 46.4. The Government may either prepare the quality assurance surveillance plan or require the offerors to submit a proposed quality assurance surveillance plan for the Government’s consideration in development of the Government’s plan.

4. SCOPE

To fully understand the roles and the responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the purpose of the QASP. The contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth in the contract. The QASP is established to provide Government surveillance oversight of the contractor’s performance to assure that it is timely, effective, and is delivering the results specified in the contract. The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor’s quality assurance/control efforts.

https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2046_4.html https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2037_6.html https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2046_4.html#wp1070241

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

5. GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND RESOURCES

The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan and shall have responsibilities for the implementation of this QASP as follows:

IAMD Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), assures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties, and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the contractor on technical matters, the PM is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned PM: COL Philip Rottenborn Organization: IAMD Project Office Telephone: (256) 313-3576 Email: philip.g.rottenborn.mil@mail.mil

Contracting Officer (KO) – A person duly appointed with the authority to enter into, administer, or terminate contractual actions, such as a contract or task order, and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government. The KO assures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, assures compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguards the interest of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the KO that assures the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned KO: Bryan Luchsinger Organization: Army Contracting Command – Redstone (ACC-R) Telephone: (563) 210-4946Email: bryan.g.luchsinger.civ@mail.mil

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – An individual designated in writing by the KO to act as his/her authorized representative to assist in the administration of the contract. The source of authority for the COR is the KO. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR should assure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is also responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor or COR deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the KO for action. COR responsibilities include interaction with the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and may include, but are not limited to, the responsibilities identified in Table 1.

Assigned COR: Jerome Paul Organization: IAMD Project Office Telephone: (256) 313-4910 Email: jerome.paul.civ@mail.mil mailto:todd.m.page2.civ@mail.mil

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

Table 1: COR and DCMA Responsibilities

Responsibility IAMD DCMA

Cost and Performance Assessments

COR – Maintain surveillance of IAMD support work package performance. Generate and coordinate COR letters at request of the PM or resulting from Program Management Reviews (PMRs).

Support as required.

Meetings (technical direction/assignment of action items/meeting entrance & closure)

COR – Leads a Government caucus for key meetings determined to be owned by IAMD.

Responsible for meeting entrance and exit criteria (objective and outcomes).

DCMA Program Integrator (PI) – Attends/supports as necessary.

Responsibility IAMD DCMA

Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) Reviews (Includes software deliveries)

COR (in conjunction with or delegation to) IAMD Data Management (DM) – Conduct reviews of IAMD Support Contract Line Identification Number (CLIN) CDRLs.

Incorporate and coordinate inputs from other organizations. Approve CDRL disposition letter.

DM – Keep a complete repository of contractual CDRL deliveries. Assess software intellectual property assertions.

Support as required.

Requirements Clarifications COR – All requirements clarifications coordinated and approved by COR.

Support as required.

Hardware and Software Deliveries

The IAMD PO is guided by and assesses inspection and acceptance of deliverables per contract requirements Section E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCEInform KO of acceptance or issues.

Quality Assurance Representative (QAR) – Accept end item deliveries identified in CLIN & Sub- Line Item Number (SLIN) SOW Allocation tab on DD Form 250. . Provide inputs to COR.

Contract Changes (Specifications/option awards/Relief/Funding/ updating attachments)

COR – Approve and submit recommended changes and coordinate changes with KO.

Changes to specifications, deviations, or waiver letters will be coordinated with KO and signed by COR.

PI – Provide inputs as appropriate.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

IAMD Performance Management Division (PMD) Chief: Responsible for development and execution of the IAMD Configuration/Data Management (CDM) Program, IAMD Product Assurance (PA) Program, and IAMD Production Program.

PMD Chief: Jonathan B. Hill Telephone: (256) 876-5544 Email: jonathan.b.hill.civ@mail.mil

DCMA – The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), aside from any required DCMA contract administrative responsibilities already in place IAW FAR 42.2 and 42.3, will delegate as needed any additional duties upon contract award. These duties will be specified in a delegation letter (e.g.

Quality Letter of Delegation).

DCMA Program Integrator (PI): Thomas Mann, IFMC Program Integrator DCMA Telephone: (256) 830-3538 Email: thomas.h.mann8.civ@mail.mil

6. METHODS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE

A. Description of Surveillance Methods to be used in monitoring contract performance:

(1) Routine surveillance of support activities, including monitoring of the contractor’s adherence to the contract terms, conditions, and performance requirements as well as assessing their responsiveness to changes in technical direction.

(2) Review of monthly cost and performance/progress, status, and management reports to assure that the contractor is making adequate progress towards meeting contract objectives as well as making required deliverables on time and within estimated costs.

Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) Assessments

COR – Assigned as Assessing Official (AO) for area identified in the CLIN & SLIN SOW Allocation tab. Develop CPAR inputs for area of responsibility.

Consolidate inputs and coordinate resulting assessment.

IAMD PM – Assigned as Reviewing Official

(RO).

Provide RO inputs and inform other Component Acquisition Program (CAP) PMs of assessment.

Support as required.

Government Furnished Property (GFP) including Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government Furnished Information ( GFI), and Government Furnished Software (GFS)

IAMD Logistics – Develop IAMD position for decision.

COR – Coordinate and approve.

PI – Notify IAMD of recommended changes/issues.

mailto:jonathan.b.hill.civ@mail.mil https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2042_2.html https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2042_3.html mailto:thomas.h.mann8.civ@mail.mil

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

(3) Evaluate and assess all contract deliverables for adherence to the SOW, performance work statement requirements, technical specifications, delivery schedule, and overall quality of the product or service. All deliverable data items shall be assessed for compliance with the appropriate DD Form 1423 CDRL requirements.

(4) Review for reasonableness the contractor invoices submitted for payment pursuant to applicable paragraph(s) in the contract. The COR will scrutinize invoices and notify the KO whenever an actual or anticipated deviation from the contract is evident.

(5) Prompt reporting to the KO of any known failures, delays, or significant deviations to performance, quality, or cost requirements.

B. Implementation of Surveillance Methods

(1) The COR will perform surveillance duties in a manner that will in no way result in contractor employees being managed as though they were Government employees. A formal, arms-length relationship shall be maintained with the contractor at all times in order to avoid even the appearance that the contract is for personal services. Communications with the contractor’s employees on contractual matters shall only be through the supervisory or lead contractor employee(s) designated by the contractor as the point of contact for such matters.

(2) All Government personnel engaged in contracting and related activities shall conduct business dealings with industry in a manner above reproach in every aspect and shall protect the U.S. Government’s interest, as well as maintain its reputation for fair and equal dealings with all contractors. DOD 5500.07-R sets forth standards of conduct for all personnel directly and indirectly involved in contracting and will be adhered to as appropriate.

(3) The COR shall not give any direction to the contractor that is not authorized by the SOW/performance work statement, as it is not the intent of the Government that a contractor be required to do anything that is not included in or covered by the contract. The COR is not empowered to award, agree to sign any contract modification as the KO, or in any way to obligate the payment of money by the Government. The COR may not take any action which may affect contract schedules, funds, or scope of effort. All contractual agreements, commitments, or modifications which involve price, quantity, quality, delivery schedules, or other terms and conditions of the contract shall be made only by the KO. The COR may be held personally liable for unauthorized acts.

(4) The COR shall maintain written records of interface with the contractor, recording the date and a brief description of all documents or other items furnished to the contractor.

Any other data that is considered pertinent shall be recorded. Records shall be made available to the KO upon reasonable notice.

7. ISSUE RESOLUTION

The issue resolution process shall occur through a Government contractual chain of command from the COR in consultation with the PM, to the KO and, if necessary, through Army Contracting Command-Redstone (ACC-R) channels up to the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA). Issues shall be addressed and resolved at the lowest level possible; however, all issues having contractual implications or which are beyond a COR’s authority shall be brought to the immediate attention of the next higher level in the contractual chain of command. The KO and COR will also notify https://ia.signal.army.mil/docs/DOD5500_7/jer1-4.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

and seek the advice of the applicable Government Attorney/Advisor on all significant issues that involve potential legal ramifications.

Every possible effort shall be made to resolve all issues at the KO level or lower. However, issues may arise that require attention from higher level investigative organizations (e.g. Inspector General, Army Audit Agency, and Criminal Investigation Command). All appointed officials on this program shall provide full and complete cooperation with any such investigative bodies.

8. CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CPAR)

In addition to the daily surveillance of contractor performance, a formal assessment is required on an annual basis IAW Part 42 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS) 5142.15. No later than 120 days after the end of the annual evaluation period, the assigned COR will assess the contractor’s performance in the following areas, as required in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS): (1) Technical, (2) Schedule, (3) Cost Control, (4) Management, and (5) Utilization of Small Business. This assessment will correlate with the assessment of the contractor’s performance in achieving the contract’s performance objectives. Input shall also be provided by the activities being supported by the contract, as applicable.

For CPAR purposes, the designated Assessing Official Representatives (AOR’s) will provide input to the AO. AORs typically are assigned from the technical, functional, quality assurance, specialty, program management, or contracting offices. Multiple AORs may be assigned per contract. Each assigned AOR has the capability of inputting and reviewing information input by the other AORs. The AOR must be a Government employee. The AO is responsible for overall program execution and is responsible for preparing, reviewing, signing, and processing the CPAR. The AO will prepare the CPAR for submittal to the contractor. The contractor will have the opportunity to comment and concur/non-concur with the AO’s evaluation. The CPAR will then be returned to the AO, who can choose to modify the ratings, finalize the CPAR, or forward it to the RO for final disposition. The RO is responsible for ensuring that the evaluation is a fair and accurate evaluation of the contractor's performance for the specific contract/order and performance period. The RO must acknowledge consideration of any significant discrepancies between the AO’s evaluation and the contractor's remarks. The final rating will then be transmitted automatically by CPARS to the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) where it will be available for official source selection use.

Performance Rating Definitions

The following performance ratings in Table 2, as defined in the DoD GUIDANCE FOR THE CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORTING SYSTEM (CPARS) dated August 2017, are used in evaluating the quality of the contractor’s performance. Input from the cognizant DCMA personnel will be sought for evaluating the contractor’s small business utilization and subcontracting efforts.

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/other/afars/5142.htm#P70_6482 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/other/afars/5142.htm#P70_6482 https://www.cpars.gov/ https://www.cpars.gov/

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

Table 2: Contractor Performance Ratings* *(Guidance for the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System, August 2017)

Performance

Rating Definition (Criteria)

Notes (How Measured)

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Very Good Performance meets contractual require-ments and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accom-plished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual require-ments. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most con-tractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

9. DOCUMENTATION

The COR will, in addition to providing documentation to the KO, maintain a complete QA file.

The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the quality assurance functions, including the originals of all Surveillance Activity Checklists (if used). All such records will be retained for the life of the contract. The COR shall forward these records to the KO at termination or completion of the contract.

10. QASP METHODOLOGY

The IAMD Project Office (PO) applies a multi-tiered and teaming approach that leverages the PO, DCMA, and the prime- and sub-contractors functional and management strengths. This approach uses the applicable mix of the following surveillance activities and methods, as appropriate, to properly monitor performance and quality from “the cradle to the grave”.

A. The IAMD Team (e.g., Government (to include project office contractor support personnel) and, when applicable, contractor personnel) –works together in a Working-level Integrated Product Team (WIPT) and Working Group (WG) environment which includes active participation as follows and evaluates data used to measure performance, as a minimum through:

(1) Product Support Manager (PSM) WIPT (Quarterly),

(2) Test and Evaluation (T&E) WIPT (Periodically),

(3) System Engineering (SE) WIPT (Periodically),

(4) Mission Assurance Working Group (MAWG) (Periodically),

(5) Reliability, Availability, & Maintainability (RAM) Working Group (Periodically),

(6) Various multiple Functional Working Groups (Periodically),

(7) DCMA Program Assessment Report (PAR) (Quarterly), and

(8) DCMA/IAMD Product Assurance Team (PAT) (Periodically).

B. The IAMD team may identify ways to improve efficiency and reduce risk through:

(1) Active participation in the Risk and Opportunity Management Working Group and

Risk and Opportunity Management Board (ROMB),

(2) Program metrics evaluation and tracking,

(3) Action item identification, root cause investigation, and closed loop resolution, and

(4) Potential Lean/Six Sigma internal or external partnering with prime and/or sub-contractors.

C. Disputes are resolved in the various teaming forums; when consensus cannot be attained, the dispute is elevated to appropriate program management for adjudication/resolution.

11. PRODUCT ASSURANCE (PA) MANAGEMENT

The IAMD PO manages PA as follows:

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

A. PA is a management function, generally including Quality Management (QM); Quality Engineering (QE); RAM; Production; and Configuration Management (CM); which verifies that in order to meet customer requirements:

(1) All critical activities are identified,

(2) Required resources are made available for each activity, and

(3) Identified resources are applied in the most efficient and effective manner.

B. The main objective of PA is to assure that contractors meet all contractual requirements.

C. IAMD PA is designed to assure that the contractors are responsible for achieving and maintaining quality. One of the specific goals is to improve performance through continuous improvement that includes rigorous assessment and corrective action.

12. QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) MANAGEMENT

The IAMD PO manages QA as follows:

A. Purpose: IAMD is guided by standard quality management practices. IAMD QA manages the organization, tasks, and responsibilities; provides reference documents and guidelines to perform the QA activities; provides the standards, practices, and conventions that are used to carry out QA activities; and provides the tools, techniques, and methodologies to support QA activities and reporting requirements. IAMD QA assures that suppliers have performed IAW the appropriate performance standards and/or requirements.

B. Scope: IAMD establishes the QA activities performed throughout the life cycle of the IAMD program.

(1) The QA group has a reporting channel to the IAMD PM through the Director of

Performance Management Division that is independent of other directors and related groups.

(2) The goal of the QA program is to verify that all products and documentation to be delivered meet all technical requirements. The QA procedures as defined shall be used to examine all deliverable products and documentation to determine compliance with technical and performance requirements throughout the life cycle of the IAMD program.

13. CONTRACTOR METRICS

The IAMD PO may use any contractor generated metrics to track trends. Examples of contractor metrics may include, but are not limited to:

A. Quantitative and Qualitative Goals – The organizational goals may consist of specific, measurable goals, referred to as “quantitative goals”, as well as more generic, overarching objectives, referred to as “qualitative goals”.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

B. Gate Reviews – The purpose is to assure cost, schedule, and performance parameters are on-track to successfully achieve the IFMC Milestone C decision.

C. Software Development Metrics

D. Integrated Support Plan (ISP) – reviews with metrics as defined in the ISP

E. PMRs

14. SHIP READINESS REVIEWS (SRR)

The IAMD Project Office assesses contractor adherence to their required SRRs as follows:

A. As identified in the SOW the Contractor shall conduct SRRs for the IAMD PO for deliveries of end items to be delivered to the Government for acceptance. The purpose of the SRRs is to enable/assist IAMD leadership to determine whether, as appropriate:

(1) Baselines and configuration identifications applicable to each configuration item have been maintained,

(2) Acceptance Test Procedure(s) and First Article Inspections (FAI)s are completed with no issues/failures,

(3) Identified SRR issues have been resolved or have a mitigation plan,

(4) SRR risks have been identified and mitigated, required work per approved SRR criteria has been completed, and any forward work/issues are documented, assessed for cost, schedule, performance impact, risk, and tracked, and

(5) Item conforms to contract and specification requirements.

15. THIRD PARTY AUDITS OR APPRAISALS

The IAMD PO may review available data from the following as appropriate:

A. ISO9001, AS9100, or equivalent systems audits – Identified as a requirement (or equivalent system) in the SOW; as a minimum assuring that suppliers are registered as appropriate, and those that are registered are meeting the standard’s requirements.

B. Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) assessments – As appropriate, in software engineering and organizational development as a process improvement approach; the IAMD PO may conduct desk audits/reviews/tracking of assessments results; as a minimum assuring that suppliers who are CMMI registered are meeting the standard’s requirements.

C. Prime Contractor supply chain audits – The IAMD PO may actively participate in and/or conduct desk audits/reviews/tracking of results and may also participate on audits as available.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

16. IAMD SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT (SCM)

The IAMD PO assesses the supply chain through SCM which entails, but is not limited to, the following:

A. SCM includes the disciplined application of general system engineering; interface, configuration, and risk management; quality, safety, and management principles; that are needed to achieve mission success throughout the acquisition process.

B. SCM standard practices provide IAMD with methods to measure, verify, and validate mission success through the collection of metrics; risk assessment; technical evaluations, independent assessments, and reviews; facility or supplier audits; and conduct of test.

C. SCM standard practices apply to prime contract developers and suppliers involved in designing, developing, fabricating, manufacturing, testing, deploying, and supporting systems under the cognizance of IAMD. Developers and suppliers include prime contractors, subcontractors, sub-tier suppliers, integrators, and Government laboratories.

17. DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY (DCMA)

The IAMD PO actively incorporates DCMA into contractor/contract surveillance and leverages its expertise and services in the following areas:

A. As appropriate, DCMA develops both a HW and a SW Program Support Plan (PSP) detailing DCMA functional surveillance plans and contract dictated quality system monitoring activities.

B. Per IAMD PO Quality Letters of Instruction (QALI), DCMA oversight of sub-tier supplier management may be developed as appropriate to manage mission or safety critical parts, materials, and/or processes.

C. Periodic and/or 100% inspection shall be IAW contract requirements and accomplished by

DCMA as specified in the contract or DCMA letters of delegation.

D. DCMA metrics for LRIP/FRP may be incorporated in the DCMA Program Assessment Report (PAR) provided monthly or quarterly.

E. PA Management – Managed according to the DCMA Government Contract Quality

Assurance (GCQA) Surveillance Plan, if developed.

F. Production Surveillance – Begins with the production of RDT&E units that require verification of configuration.

G. Software Surveillance – Managed according to any DCMA Program Software Surveillance

Plan (PSSP), if developed.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

H. Earned Value – Managed according to any DCMA Earned Value Management Program Surveillance (EVMPS) Plan and/or the DCMA Information Systems Standard Surveillance Plan, if developed.

I. SE – Surveillance of the LRIP/FRP may cover the following sixteen (16) SE processes; the process applicable in each phase may be assessed commensurate with DCMA’s ratings of risks as the program matures and as indicated:

(1) Refinement of Contract Technical Requirements

(2) Requirement Analysis and Design Approach

(3) Solution Design

(4) Implementation Effort

(5) Integration Effort

(6) Verification Effort

(7) Validation Effort

(8) Transition Effort

(9) Decision Analysis

(10) Technical Planning

(11) Technical Assessment

(12) Requirements Management

(13) Risk Management

(14) CM

(15) Technical DM

(16) Interface Management

J. Supply Chain Predictability – The items listed below may be addressed at a future event, if appropriate:

(1) Critical or problem supplier performance issues

(2) Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS)

(3) Critical item surveillance

(4) Supply Chain Material Records Management

(5) Supplier product assurance

(6) Supplier rating concerns

(7) Procurement setup

(8) Supply Chain Manufacturing Readiness Levels (MRLs)

(9) Delay reporting

(10) Continuous Improvement

(11) Contractor Purchasing System Review

(12) Inventory Assessment

K. Manufacturing Engineering – The items listed below may be addressed at a future event, if appropriate:

(1) Production Planning and Control

(2) Work Measurement

(3) Continuous Improvement

(4) Producibility

(5) Manufacturing Schedule/Plan

(6) Resources

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

(7) Corrective Action and Re-Planning

(8) Schedule Performance

(9) Delay reporting

(10) Industrial Labor Relations

18. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

The IAMD PO is guided by and assesses inspection and acceptance of deliverables per contract requirements, typically in Section E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE.

19. HARDWARE (HW) AND SOFTWARE (SW) TEST FEEDBACK

As LRIP/FRP integrates into the IFMC system the IAMD PO assesses test activities as system development and fielding occurs. Testing will be complex with a mix of sensors and interceptors.

As appropriate and related to LRIP/FRP, the IAMD PO may employ the following testing activities (not exhaustive) that integrate with other quality assurance surveillance efforts:

A. MEI Integration and Test

(1) Government Verification Testing (GVT) and/or Contractor Verification Testing (CVT)

a. MIL-STD and EMI/EMC Qualification

b. Transportability

c. SW Qualification

d. Environmental Qualification Testing

(2) MEI Acceptance

(3) SRR

B. LRIP/FRP Operational Test

(1) MEP Configurations

(2) Force Development Experimentation (FDE) /LUT

(3) Early Operational Assessment

(4) SW/HW In The Loop

a. C-SIL

b. G-SIL

c. T-SIL

(5) Acquisition & Tracking

(6) Flight tests with Intercepts

C. LRIP/FRP Developmental Test

(1) Reference Task Force Configuration

(2) Integrated DT Objectives

(3) SW/HW In The Loop

a. C-SIL

b. G-SIL

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

c. T-SIL

(4) Production Qualification Test (PQT)/Qualification Tests

(5) System Integration and Check out (SICO)

(6) Range Integration and Checkout (RICO)

(7) Search/Tracks, Missile Flight Tests (with or without Intercepts), and other range activities

(8) Acquisition & Tracking

(9) Flight tests with Intercepts

D. LRIP/FRP Operational Test

(1) Reference Task Force Configuration

(2) Force Development Test (FDT)/ Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E)

(3) Operational Assessment

(4) SW/HW In The Loop

a. C-SIL

b. G-SIL

c. T-SIL

(5) SICO

(6) RICO

(7) Search/Tracks, Missile Flight Tests (with or without Intercepts), and other range activities

(8) Acquisition & Tracking

(9) Flight tests with Intercepts

E. LRIP Fielding

(1) SICO

(2) PQT/Qualification Tests as required

(3) Program, Technical, and Production Management

(4) Pilot Line Verification (PLV)

(5) SRR

(6) Physical Configuration Audit (PCA)

20. CUSTOMER FEEDBACK

As system development and fielding occurs IAMD PO may employ the following (not exhaustive) to manage and track quality assurance:

A. User Conferences

B. T&E Conferences

C. Warfighter Experiments

D. Logistics/Maintainability Demos

E. LUT Fielding Events

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020

F. LRIP Fielding Events

G. IOT&E

H. Pre-Planned Product Improvement (P3I) Follow on Test

I. Army Product Quality Deficiency Reporting System (PQDR)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

21. ACRONYMS

ABT Air Breathing Threat ACC-R Army Contracting Command-Redstone ACO Administrative Contracting Officer [DCMA] AFARS Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement AMD Air and Missile Defense AMRDEC Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center [Army] AO Assessing Official AOR Assessing Official Representatives AR Army Regulation C-SIL Contractor-System Integration Laboratory CAP Component Acquisition Program CDM Configuration/Data Management CDRL Contract Data Requirements List CLIN Contract Line Identification Number CM Configuration Management CMMI Capability Maturity Model Integration CMO Contract Management Office [DCMA] COR Contracting Officer’s Representative CPAR Contractor Performance Assessment Report CPARS Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System CVT Contractor Verification Testing DCMA Defense Contract Management Agency DM Data Management [IAMD] DPAS Defense Priorities and Allocations System DT Development Testing EMD Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development EVMPS Earned Value Management Program Surveillance [DCMA] FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FDE Force Development Experimentation FDT Force Development Test FRP Full Rate Production G-SIL Government-System Integration Laboratory GCQA Government Contract Quality Assurance [DCMA] GFE Government Furnished Equipment GFI Government Furnished Information GFP Government Furnished Property GFS Government Furnished Software HCA Head of the Contracting Activity HW Hardware HWIL Hardware in the Loop IAMD Integrated Air and Missile Defense IAW In Accordance With IBCS IAMD Battle Command System IFC Integrated Fire Control IFCN Integrated Fire Control Network

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

IFMC Integrated Fires Mission Command IOC Initial Operational Capability IOT&E Initial Operational Test and Evaluation ISO International Organization of Standardization ISP Integrated Support Plan KO Contracting Officer LRIP Low Rate Initial Production LUT Limited User Test MA Mission Assurance MANPRINT Manpower and Personnel Integration MAWG Mission Assurance Working Group MEI Major End Item MEP Minimum Engagement Package MRL Manufacturing Readiness Level PA Product Assurance [IAMD] PAR Program Assessment Report PAT Product Assurance Team PCA Physical Configuration Audit PCO Procuring Contracting Officer PEO M&S Program Executive Office for Missiles and Space PI Program Integrator [DCMA] PLV Pilot Line Verification PM Project Manager PMD Performance Management Division PMR Program Management Review PO Project Office PPIRS Past Performance Information Retrieval System PQDR Product Quality Deficiency Reporting System [Army] PQT Production Qualification Test PSP Program Support Plan PSSP Program Software Surveillance Plan [DCMA IBCS] QA Quality Assurance QALI Quality Assurance Letter of Instruction QAR Quality Assurance Representative [DCMA] QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan QPP Quality Program Plan RAM Reliability, Availability, & Maintainability RDT&E Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation RICO Range Integration and CheckOut RO Reviewing Official ROMB Risk and Opportunity Management Board S-FSC Software Fire Solution Computer SCM Supply Chain Management SE System Engineering SICO System Integration and CheckOut SOW Statement of Work SRR Ship Readiness Review

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 22 Nov 2020 to the restriction on the title page.

SW Software T-SIL Tactical-System Integration Laboratory T&E Test and Evaluation TPM Technical Performance Measures TSEE Target State Estimator/Extrapolator WAWF Wide Area Work Flow WG Working Group WIPT Working-level Integrated Product Team