Attachment 2 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) FINAL.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Viper Maintenance Group Aircraft Maintenance & Contractor Logistics Support

30 September 2023

1. Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document that defines the metrics used to assess Contractor performance and to ensure that the Government receives a reasonable quality of service with reference to contractual requirements and to ensure that systematic quality assurance methods are utilized in the administration of the performance based Contractor Support Services contract.

The contract supports daily aircraft operations at NAS Fallon, NV and associated detachments. The Contractor shall provide three levels of aircraft maintenance (organizational, selected intermediate, and limited depot), logistics management, program management, technical management, financial management, and functional check flight test support for Navy F-16A/B/C/D aircraft.

The contract contains Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for organizational and intermediate maintenance and depot aircraft painting and cost-reimbursable (non-fee bearing) CLINs for travel and material. The contract will be for a period of eight

(8) years with an option to extend for an additional six (6) months. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

2. Authority Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under FAR Part 46, Inspection of Services clauses, which provide for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract.

3. Scope The Contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract. The QASP is put in place to provide Government oversight of the Contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering quality products and services as specified by the contract.

4. Government Resources The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

Contracting Officer – The person duly appointed with the authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract is in the Procurement Group Division. Contracting Officers are designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as an authorized representative to assist in administering the contract at NAS Fallon, NV. The COR’s limitation of authority is contained in the written letter of appointment.

Alternative Contracting Officer Representative (ACOR) – An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as its authorized representative, in the absence of the COR, to assist in administering the contract. The ACOR will be appointed in the resulting contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

5. Responsibilities The following Government resources shall have responsibility for the implementation of this QASP:

Contracting Officer – The Contracting Officer ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The Contracting Officer assures the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract/orders. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Contracting Officer Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract/orders and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. In addition to the continued monitoring of performance, the COR will submit monthly assessments to the Contracting Officer / Program Office. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

6. Methods of Quality Assurance Documentation

a. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) – The marketplace for Contractor support services is very competitive. As such, the successful Offeror has a stake in the Government-generated CPARS. For this procurement, the Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management of key personnel, and other important areas. As this information may affect future source selections throughout the Department of Defense (DoD), the Government assessment of this contract will be documented in CPARS. The following areas will be assessed via CPARS and each area is comprised of one or more attributes which are either quantifiable or qualifiable or both. The CPAR areas are:

Quality of Product or Service – Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards). Include, as applicable, a discussion of the accuracy of reports/data; the extent to which the products/services provided meet the specifications of the contract; the extent to which the contractor’s work measures up to commonly accepted technical or professional standards; and the degree of Government technical direction required to solve problems that arise during performance.

Schedule – Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules and administrative requirements. This assessment of the contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule should include the contractor’s efforts during the assessment period that contribute to or affect the schedule variance. This element applies to contract closeout activities as well as contract performance.

Cost Control – Assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. Include, as applicable, a discussion of the contractor’s ability to perform within the total estimated cost (what is the relationship of the negotiated costs and budgeted costs to actuals); innovative approaches implemented by the contractor that resulted in cost savings; the timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of invoices; and the adequacy of the contractor’s budgetary internal controls.

Business Relations – Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective actions, proposal submittals, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, and customer satisfaction. Include, as applicable, a discussion of customer orientation displayed by the contractor; degree of satisfaction with amount of interaction between the contractor and the Government; adequacy of the contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems and the contractor’s management of Government Furnished Property (GFP) if GFP has been provided to the contractor under the contract;

timeliness of awards to subcontractors and management of subcontractors, including subcontractor costs; efforts taken to ensure early identification of subcontract problems and the timely application of corporate resources to preclude subcontract problems from impacting overall prime contractor performance; and the amount of prime contractor effort devoted to managing subcontracts and whether the subcontractors were an integral part of the contractor’s team.

Management of Key Personnel – Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing, when necessary, key personnel. Include, as appropriate, a discussion of how well the contractor matched the qualifications of key positions, as described in the contract, with the personnel who filled the positions; whether the contractor supported key personnel so they were able to work effectively; corrective actions taken by the contractor in the event key personnel did not perform well; and extent to which replacements for key personnel met or exceeded the qualifications of the position as described in the contract.

Utilization of Small Business – Assess whether the contractor provided maximum practicable opportunity for Small Business to participate in contract performance consistent with efficient performance of the contract. Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract relating to Small Business participation, including FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Businesses, FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts), and DFARS 252.219-7003 Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Assess any small business participation goals which are stated separately in the contract. Assess achievement on each individual goal stated within the contract or subcontracting plan, including good faith effort if the goal was not achieved.

Other Areas – Assess additional evaluation areas unique to the contract or that cannot be captured elsewhere.

The evaluation ratings (excluding Utilization of Small Business) for all areas are as follows:

Exceptional - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the

Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory - Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task contain some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed reflect 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.

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

Government Relief - When a metric is not met due to factors outside of the Contractor’s control, the Contractor shall provide documented evidence of such for each applicable instance and submit a Request for Government Relief Memo (Enclosure 2) request for Government relief (in writing to the COR via the CMMT officer and Maintenance Officer as endorsers).

The COR will notify the Contractor in writing of the determination to approve or disapprove the request for relief. Government Relief will be documented as ‘no grade’ i.e. if the requirement did not exist. It is important for the contractor to understand that the standard to qualify an instance of Government Relief is “to the Government’s satisfaction” including but not limited to documentation and CMMT investigation of evidence that supports Government Relief. In disputed cases, the COR will have to be deliberative about the qualification of requests and retains sole authority to grant or deny relief on behalf of the Government. Grading assessments will NOT be made in instances where Government Relief has been applied for until evidence supporting Government Relief has been supplied to the Government’s satisfaction and all instances of Government Relief for the reporting period are adjudicated by the COR.

The evaluation ratings for Utilization of Small Business are as follows:

Exceptional – Exceeded all negotiated subcontracting goals or exceeded at least one goal and met all of the other negotiated subcontracting goals for the current period. Had exceptional success with initiatives to assist, promote, and utilize small business (SB), small disadvantaged business (SDB), women-owned small business (WOSB), HUBZone small business, veteran-owned small business (VOSB) and service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB). Complied with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. Exceeded any other small business participation requirements incorporated in the contract, including the use of small business participation requirements incorporated in the contract, including the use of small businesses in mission critical aspects of the program. Went above and beyond the required elements of the subcontracting plan and other small business requirements of the contract. Completed and submitted Individual Subcontract Reports and/or Summary Subcontract Reports in an accurate and timely manner.

Very Good – Met all of the negotiated subcontracting goals in the traditional socio-economic categories (SB, SDB, and WOSB) and met at least one if the other socio-economic goals (HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB) for the current period. Had significant success with initiatives to assist, promote, and utilize SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB. Complied with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. Met or exceeded any other small business participation requirements incorporated in the contract, including the use of small business in mission critical aspects of the program. Endeavored to go above and beyond the required elements of the subcontracting plan. Completed and submitted Individual Subcontract Reports and/or Summary Subcontract Reports in an accurate and timely manner.

Satisfactory – Demonstrated a good faith effort to meet all of the negotiated subcontracting goals in the various socio-economic categories for the current period. Complied with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. Met any other small business participation requirements included in the contract. Fulfilled the requirements of the subcontracting plan included in the contract. Completed and submitted Individual Subcontract Reports and/or Summary Subcontract Reports in an accurate and timely manner.

Marginal – Deficient in meeting key subcontracting plan elements. Deficient in complying with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and any other small business participation requirements in the contract. Did not submit Individual Subcontract Reports and/or Summary Subcontract Reports in an accurate or timely manner. Failed to satisfy one or more requirements of a corrective action plan currently in place; however, does show an interest in bringing performance to a satisfactory level and has demonstrated a commitment to apply the necessary resources to do

so. Required a corrective action plan.

Unsatisfactory - Noncompliant with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9, DFARS 252.219-7003, and any other small business participation requirements in the contract. Did not submit Individual Subcontract Reports and/or Summary Subcontract Reports in an accurate and timely manner.

Showed little interest in bringing performance to a satisfactory level or is generally uncooperative.

Required a corrective action plan

b. CPARS Procedures - The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) will designate the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) to be responsible for establishing a surveillance process that will ensure the collection and recording of definitive quantitative and qualitative data.

The COR will receive, code, validate, assess, monitor, report, compile, and present the performance information to the Program Manager within ten working days after the end of each assessment period. The PM and PCO are responsible for collating the submitted surveillance data into the CPARS reporting system.

7. Methods of Surveillance - This QASP sets forth the performance assessment methods, performance standards, surveillance methods, incentives, and definitions for evaluation areas and ratings. If the Government identifies a discrepancy, the Contractor will be issued a Corrective Action Request (CAR), Enclosure (1). The Contractor shall respond by the suspense date provided on the CAR. All of the above CPARS areas of performance will be surveilled by designated local Government representatives (COR and CMMT) except Utilization of Small Business which is surveilled by designated Government representatives at the F-16 Program Office (PMA-226). Surveillance may be conducted via multiple means, including but not limited to; Metrics Collection, Spot Checks, Observations, CDRL Reviews, Planning / Meeting Participation, Maintenance Program Assessments, Aviation Maintenance Inspections, Conventional Weapons Technical Proficiency Inspections, Explosive Safety Inspections, Building and Program Assessments / Inspections,

8. Surveillance Documentation - The COR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, assessments, inspections, spot checks, and actions related to the Government’s performance of the quality assurance surveillance function, including the original Quality Assurance Checklists. All such records will be maintained for the life of the contract.

9. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) Corrective Action Request Enclosure (2) Request for Government Relief Memo

Viper Maintenance Group Aircraft Maintenance & Contractor Logistics Support Performance Assessment

General

The metrics encompass the essential attributes necessary for the measurement of Contractor performance in a uniform manner throughout the life of the contract. The Contractor shall perform all maintenance as stated in the PWS for all Contractor assigned aircraft regardless of aircraft status code AND regardless of location, unless an exemption is provided by the COR. Contractor assigned aircraft is defined as all aircraft in material condition reporting status (IN-MCRS) and out of reporting for MCRS (OUT-MCRS), as defined in the COMNAVFORINST 4790.2 (series). All P&E requests shall be reviewed & approved by the COR. This assessment applies to all Contractor assigned aircraft located at NAS Fallon. If NAS Lemoore is stood up as a permanent detachment, those aircraft will be assessed as part of NAS Fallon’s assigned aircraft. If NAS Lemoore is stood up as a fully operational site, those assigned aircraft will be assessed as a standalone site and shall be required to achieve the same metrics as NAS Fallon. The results of the assessments will become a part of the Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR).

When a metric is not met due to factors outside of the Contractor’s control, the Contractor shall provide documented evidence of such for each applicable metric and submit a request for Government relief (Enclosure (2) of QASP) in writing to the COR IAW CDRL A032. The COR will notify the Contractor in writing of the determination to approve or disapprove the request for relief. Government relief aircraft will be counted as an up aircraft. A lack in manpower is NOT an acceptable excuse for Government relief. Any relief provided by the COR shall not apply to the Performance Metric Reduction clause contained in Section H. If the Government identifies a discrepancy, the Contractor will be issued a Corrective Action Request (CAR). The Contractor shall respond by the suspense date provided on the CAR IAW CDRL A033.

A. Projection Accuracy (CPARS - Schedule):

Intent(s):

to provide aircraft status projections to the Government to be used as a OPS planning tool to achieve and maintain a high level of accuracy in aircraft status projections

Source Data: Projected and Actual Mission Capable (MC)/Full Mission Capable (FMC) values will be recorded daily. Projections will be recorded from Daily and Weekly projection sheets (CDRL A034).

Actuals will be recorded from OOMA data before the first go each fly day. Total Aircraft Inventory data will be recorded from the daily AMSRR (CDRL A012).

Calculations: Deviations will be calculated using the Absolute Value of the result of subtracting Actuals from Projections. Deviations will be rolled up daily. Projection Accuracy will be calculated by dividing the sum of the daily Absolute Deviations by the Total Aircraft Inventory for the day and subtracting that from 100%. Note: No-fly-days will not be assessed.

Recording and Reporting: Grades will be calculated and recorded daily. Weekly calculations will be an average of the days within the corresponding week. Monthly calculations will be an average of the days within the corresponding month. Quarterly calculations will be an average of the months within the corresponding quarter (aligned with the contract PoP). Annual calculations will be an average for the months within the corresponding contract PoP. Monthly, quarterly, and annual grade assessments using the grading standard below will be reported by the COR to the PM and PCO for incorporation into IPAR/CPAR documentation.

Grading (Projection Accuracy will be expressed as a percentage as specified above in Calculations,)

Exceptional (100-98%)

Very Good (97.9-96%)

Satisfactory (95.9-94%)

Marginal (93.9-92%)

Unsatisfactory (91.9% or less)

B. Mission Capable (MC) (rate expressed as a %) (CPARS - Quality of Product or Service): MC will be recorded for each Bureau Number (BUNO) assigned, the rate calculated, graded, and reported.

Intent(s):

to achieve and maintain the maximum number of flyable aircraft for the flight schedule and for future planning to drive a “fix between events” approach because opportunities for success are 3x per day to drive aircraft into Phase when an un-flyable number of hours remains

Source Data:

MC = Mission Capable aircraft; MC data will be recorded at the Government’s discretion 3x per day (for all IR aircraft) using OOMA data. MC data will also be recorded for each aircraft assigned to an event line.

In-Reporting (IR) aircraft = All “A” coded aircraft – (In Service Repair (ISR) aircraft + Depot Maintenance or Deport Modernization aircraft). IR data will be recorded 1x per day using AMSRR cross referenced with OOMA.

Calculations:

F-16A/B/D: MC = Sum of aircraft in an Up (flyable status) or PRO (ready for FCF) status

F-16C: MC = Sum of aircraft in an Up (flyable status) or PRO (ready for FCF) status plus no discrepancies with EOC C coded equipment

MC% = ((MC) – (MC> 5 consecutive working days without flying)) / IR

Recording and Reporting: Grades will be calculated and recorded daily. Weekly calculations will be an average of the days within the corresponding week. Monthly calculations will be an average of the days within the corresponding month. Quarterly calculations will be an average of the months within the corresponding quarter (aligned with the contract PoP). Annual calculations will be an average for the months within the corresponding contract PoP. Monthly, quarterly, and annual grade assessments using the grading standard below will be reported by the COR to the PM and PCO for incorporation into IPAR/CPAR documentation.

Grading assessments will NOT be made in instances where Government Relief has been applied for until evidence supporting Government Relief has been supplied to the Government’s satisfaction and all instances of Government Relief for the reporting period are adjudicated by the COR. Up aircraft which have not been flown in the preceding 5 working days will be removed from the numerator of the above calculation.

Grading Standards:

F-16 MC readiness standards are established by the TYCOM (CNAFINST 3510.11 series and NAE MCAR process). The 3510.11 MC standard = 75%.

Exceptional (100 - 91.8%)

Very Good (91.7 – 83.4%)

Satisfactory (83.3 - 75%)

Marginal (74.9 – 66.6%)

Unsatisfactory (66.5 or less)

C. Aircraft Discrepancy Book (ADB) Daily Average Up-gripe Count (CPARS - Quality of Product or Service): The Government shall randomly select at least one Mission Capable aircraft each day and will count the number of documented “up” discrepancies in the ADB. Corrosion discrepancies, discrepancies in awaiting parts status, special inspections, and TDs will not be included in this count and any valid claims for Government Relief will be subtracted from the count. The Daily Average Up-gripe Count will be determined by dividing the total number of “up” discrepancies by the total number of aircraft surveilled. An ADB Up-gripe Count, rating will be reported IAW the Monthly Performance Assessment Table for ADB Up-gripe Count.

Monthly Performance Assessment Table for ADB Up-gripe Count

Number Of Discrepancies

Rating

>20 Unsatisfactory

16-19 Marginal

10-15 Satisfactory

6-10 Very good

1-5 Outstanding

D. FMC (rate expressed as a percentage) (CPARS - Quality of Product or Service):

Intent: to achieve daily FMC on a percentage of aircraft congruent with TYCOM readiness standards for assigned F-16 aircraft.

Source Data:

OOMA: required systems (as per F-16 Mission Essential Subsystem Matrix (MESM) are documented as ready at the moment of release for SFF – CMMT will record each FMC aircraft’s Equipment Operability Code (EOC) codes from OOMA as they stood at the moment of release and record each event’s FMC Pass / Fail assessment throughout every fly day.

Pass = (at the moment of release) no Partial Mission Capable (PMC) EOC codes against systems specified in the MESM.

Fail = (at the moment of release) any PMC EOC codes against systems specified in the MESM OR a maintenance cancellation of the event line due to aircraft or weapon system non-availability.

F-16 MESM: list of systems required to achieve FMC.

Calculations:

FMC = Up & correctly configured aircraft with no PMC EOC coded systems

FMC percentage = the sum of events where the aircraft checked FMC, divided by the total number of events on that fly day, converted to a percentage.

Recording and Reporting: Grades will be calculated and recorded daily. Weekly calculations will be an average of the days within the corresponding week. Monthly calculations will be an average of the days within the corresponding month. Quarterly calculations will be an average of the months within the corresponding quarter (aligned with the contract PoP). Annual calculations will be an average for the months within the corresponding contract PoP. Monthly, quarterly, and annual grade assessments using the grading standard below will be reported by the COR to the PM and PCO for incorporation into IPAR/CPAR documentation.

Grading Standards:

FMC readiness standards are established by the TYCOM (CNAFINST 3510.11 series and NAE FMCAR process). The 3510.11 FMC standard = 70%.

Exceptional (100.0 – 90.0%)

Very Good (89.9 – 80.0%)

Satisfactory (79.9 – 70.0%)

Marginal (69.9 – 59.9%)

Unsatisfactory (59.8 or less)

E. Aircraft Acceptance Metrics (Expressed as Pass/Fail for each BUNO in 3 categories) (CPARS

- Schedule):

Intent(s): to motivate a quick turn around and incorporation of aircraft into flight line inventory and availability of the aircraft soon after physical custody transfer.

Source Data:

OOMA aircraft records, logsets, baseline

Chart A inventory

AMSRR reporting

Calculations:

The number of days between Aircraft Arrival and Inspection completion will be calculated

The number of days between Aircraft Arrival and Logs & Records work completion will be calculated

The number of days between Aircraft Arrival and Acceptance FCF completion will be calculated

Recording and Reporting: Grades will be recorded for each BUNO and Category. Monthly assessments using the grading criteria and categories below will be reported by the COR to the PM and PCO for incorporation into IPAR/CPAR documentation.

Grading: (Pass / Fail grades will be assigned to each applicable BUNO in the following three categories)

Aircraft inspection: all aspects related to acceptance involving inspection including but not limited to serial number verifications and material/operational condition shall be accomplished within five working days of physical receipt of the aircraft from the transferring activity’s custody.

Aircraft log-set OOMA/baseline load: the complete aircraft baseline log-sets shall be created within thirty (30) days of physical receipt of the aircraft from the transferring activity’s custody.

Fix/Groom: the aircraft’s acceptance FCF shall be completed within sixty (60) days of physical receipt of the aircraft from the transferring activity’s custody.

Data Performance Standards: (CPARS – Other Areas)

Description

Content Standard

Frequency Standard

Surveillance

Method/Measure

Each Contract Data Requirements List

(CDRL)

Each CDRL submission shall be in accordance with (IAW) each respective CDRL.

Content shall be graded against each respective Data Item Description (DID) cited within each respective CDRL; unless specified in each CDRL.

If the CDRL submission is not IAW each respective DID, the Contractor shall be given the below additional time to fix any content errors.

A memo for Government Relief is not required for content updates.

Daily CDRLs: 3 hours Weekly CDRLs: 1 day Monthly CDRLs: 3 days One-Time CDRLs: 5 days

Each CDRL submission shall be IAW each respective CDRL.

Frequency shall be graded against each CDRL’s respective Frequency deadline and the Date of First Submission deadline. If the CDRL is a one-time requirement, the frequency shall be graded upon meeting the Date of First Submission deadline.

If the Contractor fails to provide each CDRL by the stated frequencies, the Contractor shall submit a detailed memo requesting Government Relief.

Government Relief shall be approved or denied by the

COR.

Surveillance by

CMMT & COR.

Content Standard & Frequency Standard are graded separately as pass/fail.

Incentives

Assessment Period

Acceptable Performance Definition

How Measured

Incentives

Period of Performance

All measurement areas rated “Satisfactory” or above.

Annually & Contract Closeout

(+) Contractor receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST

Enclosure (1)

Example

1. DATE: 2. REFERENCE NUMBER:

3. TO: 4. FROM:

5. The following non-compliance requires corrective action:

6. In your reply, please include a description of:

( ) Action taken to correct specific non ( ) Identify measures to verify effectiveness compliance behavior of corrective action taken

( ) Root cause of the non-compliance ( ) Action taken to determine other processes affected by the same or similar root causes

7a. Category non-compliance:

(reference)

( ) Verbal ( ) Written

7b. Classification:

( ) Critical ( ) Major ( ) Minor

8a. Non Conformance discussed with: 8b. Title:

9. This non-compliance may affect safety. (if yes, send copy to Safety Office)

YES/NO

10. This non-compliance may affect the HAZ/MAT program. (if yes, send a copy to

HAZMAT)

YES/NO

11. Request you reply within (5) working days. If response cannot be finalized within this time, please submit date your investigation will be completed.

COR SIGNATURE:

12. Contractor response:

(Use this document as a cover sheet and attach your response)

13a. Type or print name of contractor rep:

13b. Signature: 13c. Date:

14. COR Verification and follow-up on contractor’s response:

15a. Typed COR Name: 15b. Signature: 15c. Date:

Enclosure (2)

Example

Attachment: Request for Government Relief Memo

Date:

Contract Number:

Serial Number:

From: Contractor Site Lead To: Contracting Officer’s Representative Via: CMMT & Maintenance Officer

Subj: Request for Government Relief

Ref: QASP Para / Data Instance

1. Narrative

2. List of attached documentation

1st Endorsement: CMMT (Comments) (Digital Signature)

2nd Endorsement: Maintenance Officer (Comments) (Digital Signature)

Final Decision: Contracting Officer’s Representative (Comments) (Digital Signature)