Attachment 2-Contractor Performance Customer Input Sheet Questionnaire__24RE002.docx

ATTACHMENT 2

Contractor Performance Customer Input Sheet/ Questionnaire

Solicitation Number: N4215824RE002

1. Please complete this questionnaire. Handwritten responses are sufficient. If you need more space than that provided, please attach additional pages or write on the back. Responses will be treated as source selection sensitive information. This form is available in electronic format (MS Word) or as "hard copy." Completed questionnaires may be emailed or faxed to:

Norfolk Naval Shipyard Contracting Department Attn: Dushani Starks and Chris Vieira, Contract Specialists

Email: dushani.c.starks.civ@us.navy.mil Email: christopher.f.vieira.civ@us.navy.mil

2. Explanation of codes:

CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

HA HIGHLY ACCEPTABLE – Superior accomplishment of contract requirements and very high customer satisfaction. Very Low Performance Risk. Based on the offeror's performance record, very little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

A ACCEPTABLE - Fully-compliant accomplishment of contract requirements and positive customer satisfaction. Low Performance Risk: Based on the offeror's performance record, minimal (but perhaps some) doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

M MARGINAL - Minimal or weak accomplishment of contract requirements and low level of customer satisfaction. High Performance Risk. Based on the offeror's performance record, significant doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

U UNACCEPTABLE - Failure to properly accomplish contract requirements and failure to satisfy customer. Very High Performance Risk. Based on the offeror's performance record, it appears unlikely that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area not applicable to effort assessed.

3. Please complete the following identifying information and past performance assessment:

a. Contractor:

b. Contract number: _________________________

c. Period of Performance: ____________________

d. Negotiated price or cost at award: __________________________________

e. Current estimated contract dollar amount: ____________________________

f. Dollar value of work actually performed to date: _______________________

g. Describe product/ service acquired: __________________________________

4. Assessment Elements. Circle the appropriate letter for each item on the questionnaire (or if forwarding electronic copy via e-mail, “bold” the appropriate letter) and provide supporting narrative.

(1) Quality/Meeting Contract Requirements: The offeror’s demonstrated history of delivering products and services that met or exceeded the requirements of the contract.

· How would you describe your level of customer satisfaction?

HA A M U N

The Government is very satisfied with the level of performance of the Contractor. The Contractor has many years of experience working with the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program (NNPP) and understands the specialized needs of the NNPP. The Contractor consistently provides good customer service and the level of experience the Contractor has with the Government contributes to the successful execution of the contract.

· Were there instances of rework and/or deficiency reports? (If yes, explain)

HA A M U N

· Did the contractor engage in effective and/or innovative work applications that were beneficial to the Government?

HA A M U N

This is not applicable to the contract effort.

(2) Quality/Timeliness.

· Did the Contractor meet/comply with performance schedules?

HA A M U N

The Contractor performed all work in a timely manner and within all time constraints required by the contract as well as the Contractor’s radioactive material license. The Contractor met all requested shipping dates. No major problems occurred pertaining to performance schedule. No significant weaknesses were found with performance schedule.

· Rate the timeliness of submission of requested information, reports and invoicing.

HA A M U N

The Contractor consistently provides timely and accurate responses to technical information requests. The Contractor is very customer oriented and has provided consistent support over the life of the contract. All reporting requirements have been in accordance with contractual requirements and have been submitted within contractual timeframes. Invoicing has been accurate. The Contractor has provided special quotes to support unique projects.

(3) Quality/Contractor Responsiveness. The offeror’s demonstrated ability to:

· respond to customer concerns

HA A M U N

The Contractor is very responsive and customer oriented. If concerns were to occur during performance of the contract, the Contractor communicates effectively and to the satisfaction of the Government.

· isolate and resolve problems

· the number and severity of problems,

· the effectiveness of corrective actions taken.

HA A M U N

During the performance of the contract, there were no significant events which occurred. The Contractor requires little or no technical direction by the Government. The Contractor provided all data as requested by the Government.

· Contractor's cost control. Did the contractor deliver at the agreed-to price/cost? Describe the reasons for changes to contract value (e.g., scope changes, overrun/underrun, Government-imposed schedule changes, etc.)

HA A M U N

This is a firm-fixed price contract.

5. Additional Observations/Information

· Identify the contractor's overall strengths and weaknesses.

There were no significant weaknesses identified during performance of the contract. The Contractor’s many years of experience of working with the NNPP is an overall strength. The Contractor’s attitude towards providing good and consistent customer service greatly contributes to the successful execution of the contract. The Contractor provides an online Customer Portal which provides a streamlined document submittal system which reduces review and approval times for required waste profiles and shipping documents. The Customer Portal executes multiple waste profile and shipping document double-checks which helps ensure regulatory compliance and reduces the risk of errors in the documents.

· Given hindsight, are you satisfied that that the contract was awarded to the right contractor? Would you be pleased to have this contractor perform work for you again? Why?

The Government is satisfied that the contract was awarded to the right contractor. The Government would be pleased to have the contractor to perform this work again. The Contractor’s history with good, consistent performance, their customer oriented attitude, meeting all contractual technical requirements, and providing the online Customer Portal contributes to the continued satisfaction of the Government.

· Are you aware of any other contracted efforts performed by this contractor similar in nature to this contract? Please identify contract/program and point of contact.

I am aware that the Department of Energy (DOE) may also have a contract for similar services, but I have not seen a copy of the contract nor do I know a point of contact.

· Is there anyone else we should send this questionnaire to? Please identify by name, organization, and phone number.

6. Socioeconomic Past Performance.

Did the contractor meet (or exceed) applicable goals for utilization of small, small disadvantaged, woman-owned small business concerns, historically black colleges and universities and minority institutions?

HA A M U N

7. Please provide the name, title, address, and phone number of the person completing this questionnaire.

Kristin Corrie Nuclear Engineer Norfolk Naval Shipyard Code 106.4, Building M22-3 Portsmouth, VA 23709-1035 Phone: 757.396.2432 FAX: 757.396.3472

Thank you for your assistance in this source selection. If you have any questions, please call Dushani Starks and Chris Vieira at (757)396-8356 or Email: dushani.c.starks.civ@us.navy.mil Email: christopher.f.vieira.civ@us.navy.mil