Attachment 2 - QASP.docx

U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

Hurricane Rated HR1 and HR2 Feed Upgrade Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

May 7, 2020

Hurricane Rated 1 and HR2 Feed Upgrade

QASP REVISION HISTORY

REVISION

NUMBER

Contents

1. Introduction The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service (NESDIS) manages the U.S Civilian Meteorological Satellite program. NESDIS operates the Wallops Command and Data Acquisition Station (WCDAS), Wallops Island, Virginia and is responsible for maintaining the NESDIS antennas on site that support the mission, with the goal of maintaining operational readiness, continued support capabilities, and maximum efficiency. Satellite data acquisition from the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) and next generation weather imagery from the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite R series (GOES-R) series are mission critical NESDIS capabilities.

The objective of this acquisition is to perform antenna feed upgrades of Hurricane Rated (HR) Antennas HR1 and HR2 at WCDAS that support DSCOVR and GOES-R missions and are described in the DSCOVR/GOES-R HR1 and HR2 Feed Upgrade Statement of Work (SOW). The period of performance for this task is two years from the date of award.

The WCDAS HR1 and HR2 antennas require feed modifications to enable optimal long-term support to the DSCOVR and GOES-R missions while retaining coverage of the legacy GOES O/P missions. The antenna parabolic reflectors are 20 years old and need antenna surface assessments with photogrammetry to determine corrective actions for any performance degradation due to reflector warpage or other damage to support feed optimization and overall antenna performance.

The work will be evaluated by the HR Feed Upgrade Project Manager (PM) and the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) with support from the OSGS (Office of Satellite Ground Services) and OSPO stakeholders using the processes as described in this QASP, and per the contractor’s Quality Assurance Plan (QAP), which will define quality assurance activities and establish a Quality Assurance (QA) program.

1.1 Purpose

This QASP sets forth standard surveillance for contract monitoring. It also includes guidelines that NESDIS will use when evaluating the technical performance of the contractor.

A copy of this plan will be furnished to the contractor so that the contractor will be aware of the methods that the Government will employ in evaluating performance on this contract. This will allow for the contractor to address any concerns that the contractor may have prior to initiating work. The evaluation methods identified in this QASP, in concert with the contractor’s Quality Assurance Procedures (QAP), will assure the Government of satisfactory contractor performance.

The QASP is intended to accomplish the following:

· Summarize the types of services to be performed, and work products to be delivered, that are covered under the contract, and the desired outcomes associated with them.

· Define the contractor and government responsibilities for evaluating the performance of the contractor in delivering the products and services covered by this contract.

· Describe the evaluation methods to be used by the Government to confirm the contractor’s performance.

1.2 Scope

The QASP applies to all DSCOVR HR1 and HR2 Feed Upgrade activities as described in the SOW.

Through coordination with the contracting office, the Government retains the right to change the surveillance methods, metrics, and Quality Assurance (QA) procedures described in the QASP, or to increase or decrease the degree of surveillance efforts at any time necessary to assure contract compliance. The contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and Quality Control (QC) actions to meet the terms of the contract.

1.3 Content of the QASP

The QASP includes the following sections:

· Providing a summary of the work to be performed on the contract (Section 2.0)

· Ensuring that QASP roles and responsibilities are clear for this contract (Section 3.0)

· Defining QA surveillance methods to be applied in this contract (Section 4.0)

· Maintaining open channels for communicating with stakeholders and reporting on contract QA activities (Section 5.0)

· Resolving QA issues and concerns specific to this contract (Section 6.0)

· Provide the Performance Requirements Summary that ties requirements to the methods and outcomes (Section 7.0)

2. Summary of Work to be Performed The contractor will be responsible for the following tasks/deliverables:

1. Conduct two Antenna Surface Assessments (before and after optimization) with digital photogrammetry on each HR1 and HR2 antenna

2. Conduct two Gain-to-Noise Temperature (G/T) tests (before and after optimization)

3. Perform physical optimization of the HR1 and HR2 parabolic reflectors

4. Redesign the existing HR1 and HR2 antenna feeds

5. Modify, replace or upgrade the antenna RF system components to optimize the HR1 and HR2 antennas to support DSCOVR, GOES-R and GOES-O/P mission requirements including data downlink, command uplink, ranging and tracking

6. Conduct factory and site acceptance testing

7. Provide a recommended list of spare parts and deliver spare parts described in Section 3.2 of the SOW

8. Provide site training and documentation

9. Provide deliverables documented in Section 6, Deliverables, in the SOW

2.1 Planning

Will include a Project Plan to validate reasonable cost, schedule, and performance baselines. The Plan will specifically address management areas to include

· Scope Management

· Requirements Management

· Schedule Management

· Financial Management

· Quality Management

· Resource Management The project scope for the HR1 and HR2 antenna feed upgrades shall have the Contractor

· Execute digital photogrammetry

· Conduct G/T Testing

· Perform physical optimization of the parabolic reflector

· Redesign the existing HR1 and HR2 feed

· Replace specified Antenna RF System Components

· Conduct Site Acceptance Testing

· Provide Spare Parts

· Provide Site Training and Documentation The project requirements are detailed in the HR1 and HR2 Feed Upgrade Statement of Work (SOW) and included detailed specifications in Appendix A. A requirements traceability matrix (RTM) will ensure all requirements are defined for the project and tested using test protocols.

The Project Management Schedule (PMS) will include project milestones, schedule assumptions and project resources. This is a firm fixed price project where financial reporting on position and performance will be discussed at monthly project management status reviews. Project resources will include project management, teams or sub-contractors participating in the redesign process, engineering, manufacturing, test support and quality assurance. Planning will also include a Quality Control Plan (QCP) addressing specific management and technical methodologies to be followed during the performance of the work.

2.2 Equipment procurement

The Government may provide access to specialized RF test equipment such as Spectrum Analyzers, Oscilloscopes, Signal Generators, voltmeters etc. on a pre-coordinated case-by-case basis, subject to work-site location availability, mission priority and cost considerations,. The Government may also provide pre-coordinated assistance and operation of heavy equipment such as bucket trucks subject to work-site locational availability, mission priority and cost considerations. The Project plan documents processes for planning, selection, administration and closing of equipment procurements.

2.3 Implementation

The Contractor will perform antenna surface assessments and physical optimization of the HR1 and HR2 parabolic reflectors. Based on these results, the Contractor will design, fabricate, acquire, install and test parts, assemblies and subassemblies of the HR1 and HR2 antenna feed and RF assemblie to ensure the requirements in the SOW and Appendix A are met.

2.4 Acceptance

Will be performed for each antenna via project milestone reviews, factory and site acceptance test reports, factory and site acceptance test reviews, and inspection of completed work along with reviews of Project Quality Control Reports.

2.5 Documentation

Will include the following:

· Project Plan

· Project Management Schedule

· Weekly and Monthly Progress Reports

· Feed Assembly Drawings

· Quality Assurance Plan

· Quality Control Report

· Quality Assurance Metrics

· Design Review Packages

· Test Plans

· Test Procedures

· Test Reports Additional information regarding the required content and schedule for delivery of this documentation can be found in SOW Section 6, Deliverables.

2.6 Training

The Contractor will develop training plans and provide Government approved training for twelve people following the installation of the new feed assemblies. Training on the new feed assemblies will include how to test alignment and preventative and corrective maintenance.

2.7 IT security

The Contractor will comply with the IT Security requirements of the Department of Commerce (DOC) as outlined in Commerce Acquisition Regulation (CAR) and detailed in Section 4.8 of the SOW.

3. QASP Roles and Responsibilities The following details the roles and responsibilities for successful execution of the QASP.

3.1 Government Organization’s Personnel

3.1.1 Project Manager (PM)

The Project Manager (PM) is responsible for ensuring project quality at a project-level through implementation of and compliance with the QASP. This is also a shared responsibility for all project personnel.

3.1.2 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

The COR is responsible for managing Quality Assurance (QA) activities to ensure compliance and completeness by:

1. Serving as the liaison with the Contractor staff

2. Responsible for the final inspection and acceptance of all deliverables and reports, from a contract perspective.

3. Other such responsibilities as may be specified in the contract.

3.1.3 OSGS Staff

The OSGS staff will be responsible for reviewing contractor deliverables, participating in meetings, reviews, testing oversight, and system demonstration oversight as requested, accepting/rejecting recommendations, and assisting with QASP implementation. The OSGS staff shall provide recommendations to the PM and COR on whether the Contractor deliverables match the content requirements in the Contract.

3.1.4 OSPO Staff

OSPO staff will assist contractor and OSGS staff by reviewing and providing feedback on contractor deliverables, reviews, documentation, and results from system testing.

3.1.5 Contracting Officer (CO)

The Contracting Officer (CO) has overall responsibility for the administration of the contract. The CO is the only individual authorized to take actions on behalf of the Government to approve, amend, modify, or deviate from the contract terms, conditions, requirements, specifications, details, and/or delivery schedules. Within that authority, the CO has the ability to delegate to the Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) for the everyday administration of the contract. The CO, who is responsible for the overall administration and final closeout of the contracts, and as it relates to the implementation of the QASP, shall:

· Ensure compliance with contracting requirements

· Issue all modifications against the contracts

· Negotiate and issue contract modifications

· Resolve contractor claims and disputes

· Issue cure notices (notification that unless unacceptable performance is corrected, the Government may terminate the contract for default, IAW FAR 49.607)

· Issue show-cause letters (following a cure notice, requesting facts bearing on the case)

· Terminate contracts

3.2 Contractor Personnel

3.2.1 Contractor Team Lead

The contractor team lead will be responsible for full system implementation of all requirements and related work as described in the SOW and QASP. The contractor team lead shall be responsible for providing metrics to the PM and COR, discrepancy report work and closure, and meeting with the PM and COR as required in the SOW.

4. Quality Surveillance Process This section describes the various surveillance processes will be used on this Contract to monitor contract performance.

4.1 Methods

4.1.1 Verification and Validation

The Contractor shall implement a test program to demonstrate system compliance through verification and validation of requirements in the SOW and Appendix A, Antenna Upgrade Specifications. The Contractor shall provide a test director and a QA representative for FAT and SAT. The Government will witness each test and determine whether the test was fully compliant, partially compliant (retesting is required), or non-compliant. In the event of any non-compliance, the Contractor shall perform corrective actions to correct any discrepancies identified and, re-run the testing deemed necessary by the COR/PM (or their delegate).

The Contractor shall submit electronic copies of test reports containing results of FAT and SAT within two weeks of test completion. Test reports shall identify any deviations from the test procedures, rationale, and any alternative procedures followed. Additional requirements for acceptance testing can be found in SOW Section 5.3, Testing Specifications.

4.1.2 Analysis of Contractor’s Status Reports and Design Reviews Project status will be evaluated regularly based on weekly reports and metrics to be provided by the contractor to ensure that the project remains on schedule. Final project status will be evaluated based upon the Project Quality Control Report. The Quality Control Report will contain quality assurance metrics to include, but not be limited to, testing metrics, corrective actions with status, and hardware/software metrics associated with the design.

Design reviews are conducted for preliminary and critical design review milestones where status and metrics are also evaluated. A Preliminary Design Review (PDR) will be held within six months after contract award, and Critical Design Review (CDR), no more than ten months after contract award. PDR and CDR documentation shall include, but not be limited to:

· Design and construction documentation to include electrical schematics and drawings.

· Major software modules, routines, and execution objectives.

· Performance requirements

· Quality assurance metrics

· Final Antenna Surface Assessment Report (at PDR and CDR)

· HR1 and HR2 Antenna System link budget (at PDR and CDR)

Surveillance will be performed according to the methods described in this QASP and by meeting the schedule established between the contractor and the Government. The Contractor shall provide whatever assistance is required in the surveillance procedures.

4.2.2 Resolving Performance Issues

In the event performance issues or deficiencies are discovered through the surveillance process, the COR will provide a list of any unresolved deficiencies to the contractor's quality assurance personnel. The list will afford him/her the opportunity to demonstrate the problem and its root cause. If evidence is shown where the contractor’s quality program has already documented the deficiency, and timely corrective action is resolving the problem, the COR will follow up with the contractor’s quality assurance personnel to ensure the deficiencies are remedied in a timely manner, in accordance with the SOW.

All deficiencies associated with performance requirements listed on the Performance Requirements Summary, whether remedied by the contractor or not, will be included in the COR’s Status Report, regardless of who identified the deficiency.

Should the need arise for unplanned meetings, because of unexpected performance issues, these meetings can be called by the PM, COR, or the contractor’s quality assurance personnel.

4.2.3 Documenting Surveillance

Documentation used and referenced to perform surveillance shall consist of weekly reports, contractor plans, contractor procedures, schedules, customer feedback, and contract data requirements. This documentation provides the CO with contractor status as it applies to the performance criteria.

All documentation resulting from surveillance shall be maintained in the COR file and made available to the CO as requested.

5. Other QA Communication and Reporting All quality issues that may arise during the execution of this task, will be managed through the resolution methods defined in the QASP.

6. Resolving Quality Assurance Issues

6.1 Negative Incentives

If any of the performance requirements do not meet the Target Metric set in the PRS table, the COR shall document the discrepancy(ies) and shall notify the Contractor promptly, and the Contracting Officer, on a weekly basis, for appropriate action. When the performance is below the standard, the Government may implement a negative incentive, that includes increased surveillance and/or Contractor reporting requirements, as well as, documentation on the Contractor’s interim and annual past performance reviews (per FAR 42.15).

6.2 Notification

The COR will notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of unacceptable quality levels. The Contracting Officer will promptly provide written notification of discrepancies on a monthly basis, or immediately if the situation significantly affects the wellbeing of the project. The Contractor will be given the opportunity to respond, in writing, to each discrepancy.

6.3 Response

The Contractor shall provide a written response to the cause and the corrective action, to prevent recurrence within 10 working days after receipt of the Contracting Officer’s notification. The Contractor shall cite specific quality assurance program procedures or new procedures instituted to prevent recurrence.

7. Performance Requirements Summary

Successfully addresses Operational downtime requirements.

b) Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR)

b) Government Review of Project Quality Control Report

c) Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR)

b) Review and evaluation of training material Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) image3.png image1.png