B.08 W912EP24R0017_Attachment_Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Contract Number: TBD

Contractor: TBD

Description/Scope of Work: Perform regularly scheduled underwater cleaning of all submerged MPS components at 6 USACE Locks & Dams. Perform service calls to analyze, troubleshoot, repair, and Test the MPS to document all problems encountered and corrective actions taken to restore 100% operations to the MPS System. Purchase, assemble, and test all sensor arrays prior to being utilized in the spare parts inventory. Purchase encoders and water level sensors as directed by the COR. Remove and replace sensor arrays & (PED) sensors, water level sensors, and encoders as directed by the COR once positive identification of the need is documented.

Provide maintenance and repairs to ADS3 program and associated hardware to satisfy current ADS3 programming criteria and any minor programming criteria established by USACE in writing.

1) PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

What will be monitored?

How monitoring will take place?

Who will conduct the monitoring?

How monitoring efforts and results will be documented?

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance standards and acceptable quality levels contained in the Performance Work Statement; that the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract; and, that the Government only pays for the acceptable level of services received.

Additionally, it is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance.

It is important to understand the responsibilities of the parties and distinguish between the quality control plan and the QASP. The contractor is responsible for managing and developing a quality control plan to meet the quality standards established in the performance work statement (PWS).

The QASP is put in place to provide the Government surveillance and oversight of the contractor’s efforts in fulfilling the terms of the contract. The QASP is not part of the contract Nor is it intended to duplicate the Contractor’s quality control plan. The Government may provide the Contractor with an information copy of the QASP to support the Contractor’s efforts in developing a quality control plan that will interrelate with the QASP.

2) GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities. All personnel by name will be addressed in the contract.

A. Contracting Officer (KO): The Contracting Officer shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The Contracting Officer shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance and is the only individual that can make changes to the contract.

B. Technical Point of Contact (TPOC):

C. Contract Specialist/Administrator: The Specialist/Administrator is responsible for the day to day administration of the contract and assures that all the terms and conditions of the contract are being met. The Specialist/Administration will coordinate actions with the Contracting Officer. Additionally, they assure that receipt of all proper Government surveillance documentation is received and in the file from the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

D. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the KO, the COR shall provide documentation to the KO.

The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the KO for action.

3) METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE:

Several methods can be used to assess contractor performance. Performance tasks with the most risk or mission criticality warrant a higher level of assessment than other areas. No matter which method you select you should periodically review your assessment strategy based on documented contractor performance and adjust as necessary. Below are some examples of commonly used assessment methods.

Random sampling: Random sampling is a statistically based method that assumes receipt of acceptable performance if a given percentage or number of scheduled assessments is found to be acceptable. The results of these assessments help determine the government’s next course of action when assessing further performance of the contractor. If performance is considered marginal or unsatisfactory, the evaluators should document the discrepancy, begin corrective action, and ask the contractor why their quality control program failed. If performance is satisfactory or exceptional, they should consider adjusting the sample size or sampling frequency.

Random sampling is the most appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks. It works best when the number of instances is very large and 100% Inspection:

Using 100% Inspection is the method to evaluate the contractor when required by the contract Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) as noted in Exhibit A. Using this method of inspection, utilizes a zero deviation to the standards set forth in the contract. All services or requirements are monitored for evaluation. Such performance requirements covers all aspects of the services in order to meet the specification outlined in the PWS.

Periodic sampling: Periodic sampling is similar to random sampling, but it is planned at specific intervals or dates. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently. Selecting this tool to determine a contractor’s compliance with contract requirements can be quite effective, and it allows for assessing confidence in the contractor without consuming a significant amount of time.

Scheduled Observations: These observations will be inspections previously scheduled and coordinated with the contractor’s site supervisor. These Scheduled Observations will Include but not be limited to, the month’s trouble tickets, work orders, corrective and preventative maintenance forms and manhole inspections

Unscheduled Observations: These observations will be conducted by the COR at random.

These Unscheduled Observations will include but not be limited to, unannounced visits. Any discrepancies detected during the course of the surveillance, even if not of sufficient degree to render the service unsatisfactory for the purpose of payment deductions, will require corrective action by the contractor. The COR will notify the contractor of the deficiency as soon as it is found. If the deficiency is not corrected in what the COR deems to be a timely manner, the COR will notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, for disposition.

Trend analysis: Trend analysis should be used regularly and continually to assess the contractor’s ongoing performance over time. It is a good idea to build a database from data that have been gathered through performance assessment. Additionally, contractor-managed metrics may provide any added information needed for the analysis. This database should be created and maintained by government personnel.

Customer feedback: Customer feedback is firsthand information from the actual users of the service. It should be used to supplement other forms of evaluation and assessment, and it is especially useful for those areas that do not lend themselves to the typical forms of assessment.

However, customer feedback information should be used prudently. Sometimes customer feedback is complaint-oriented, likely to be subjective in nature, and may not always relate to actual requirements of the contract. Such information requires thorough validation.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVELS (AQLs):

The requirement can also establish an AQL for the task, if appropriate. The AQL is a recognition that unacceptable work can happen, and that in most cases zero tolerance is prohibitively expensive. In general, the AQL is the minimum number (or percentage) of acceptable outcomes that the government will permit. An AQL is a deviation from a standard. For example, in a requirement for taxi services, the performance standard might be "pick up the passenger within five minutes of an agreed upon time." The AQL then might be 95 percent, i.e., the taxi must pick up the passenger within five minutes 95 percent of the time. Failure to perform at or above the 95 percent level could result in a contract price reduction or other action.

Monthly surveillance documentation and reports prepared by the COR will be maintained in the COR file. The COR file will also contain a copy of the contract, all modifications, appointment letter and all surveillance reports to include any contract discrepancy report (CDR)

SURVEILLANCE FORMS:

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan uses specific forms to detail performance and will substantiate the government’s position in case the government seeks monetary deduction from the contractor for poor performance.

DA Form 5475 – COR Surveillance Schedule (Attachment 1) DA Form 5481 - Tally Checklist (Attachment 2) DA Form 5477 – Customer Complaint Record (Attachment 3) DA Form 5479 – Contract Discrepancy Report (Attachment 4)

CONTRACT DEFICIENCY REPORT

If the sampling results are that the number of defects exceed the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL), the services outlined in the PWS will be considered unsatisfactory for the particular requirement under surveillance. If government action or lack of action caused the unsatisfactory performance, the defects will not be counted. A memorandum will be prepared by the COR explaining the government’s action and submitted with the monthly report to the Contracting Officer.

Unsatisfactory contract performance will be reported on DA Form 5479, Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR). This form is used to notify the contractor of discrepancies found by the COR.

This is where the contractor is allowed to answer how the discrepancy will be corrected and how reoccurrence will be avoided. If unsatisfactory performance occurs in an area based on the COR’s sampling, the contractor will be given a CDR. This completed and signed CDR along with the Sampling Guide and supporting documentation will be forwarded to the Contracting Officer for disposition if not corrected in a timely manner by the Contractor. A copy will be maintained in the COR file.

METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE.

The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

The Government will observe periodically the service calls, performance compliance demonstrations, and underwater cleaning.

The contractor shall follow the specifications to properly perform service calls during normal duty hours and non-normal duty hours.

The contractor shall follow the O&M manual at each lock to properly understand, troubleshoot, and repair the MPS when needed.

The contractor shall perform underwater cleaning of all submerged MPS components using techniques identified in the specs to achieve a fully cleaned surface. An underwater video shall be provided to the COR to demonstrate the before and after condition of the surfaces cleaned.

100% INSPECTION. The Government shall evaluate the documents and reports for services provided are received on schedule and according to the PWS.

The contractor shall provide the performance compliance demonstration checklist to the COR or Lock Master immediately following the tests to demonstrate a fully functional system. Any non-compliant results shall be scheduled for repairs.

The contractor shall remove and replace spare parts on an as needed basis when such parts are successfully diagnosed for replacement. Any parts replaced that are determined to be functioning properly shall be an indication of improper diagnostic inspection for that component.

The contractor shall provide a written QC plan for any ADS3 programming revisions such that all functionality is mutually agreed between parties and demonstrated prior to implementation.

QC plan should identify any downtime of the locks required as part of the implementation.

EXHIBIT A

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT SUMMARY

The Contractor service requirements are summarized into performance objectives that relate directly to mission essential items. The performance threshold briefly describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each requirement.

These thresholds are critical to mission success.

Performance Objective

Standard Performance Threshold

Method of Surveillance

PRS # 1

The Contractor shall provide underwater dive crews, vessels, dive equipment and cleaning tools to remove all bio-growth, debris, sand, and organics from all MPS components on the lock gates. Test clean a sample area not on the MPS prior starting work to demonstrate effectiveness of cleaning techniques.

Video record before and after to document the successful removal of all items identified to be cleaned. Hand cleaning will be required where other techniques are insufficient.

The contractor provided safe, clean and operational equipment.

Zero deviation from standard

Scheduled/Unscheduled Surveillance

PRS # 2

Mechanical/Electrical Performance Demonstration Checklist shall be exercised by systematically operating the gates in accordance with all the criteria established in the O&M manuals for each lock. All checklist items failing performance functions shall be diagnosed and repaired to satisfy the checklist objectives.

All performance demonstrations shall be recorded on hard copy.

and operational equipment.

Zero deviation from standard

100% inspection will be conducted during this performance demonstration.

Scheduled surveillance will be the method used.

PRS # 3

ADS4 Upgrades and Maintenance shall be implemented to the MPS to satisfy performance checklist objectives associated with each lock structure, where applicable. Document all tests performed with a pass or fail result, and all failed tests shall be diagnosed, corrected, and retested to demonstrate compliance.

provided safe, clean, Unscheduled

Method

PRS # 4

Perform Repairs to MPS System shall include the removal and replacement of water level sensors, encoders, sensor array cartridges, daughter cards and touchscreens and any other components as needed.

The contractor provided safe, clean, Unscheduled

Method

PRS # 5

Manatee Protection Screens. A dive plan was provided and followed. Debris was cleared and the screens were repaired or replaced as required.

provided safe, clean, 100% inspection

PRS # 6

MPS Documentation Report for each Lock & Dam. A detailed Design Documentation Report shall be prepared for each lock that provides, in its entirety, all information needed to duplicate the MPS system components, design functionality, manufacturing processes, installation and maintenance processes, Operating System hardware components and software codes.

Periodic Sampling Method

PRS # 7

All MPS system and component repairs, replacements, removal, storage, installations, reinstallations and MPS operational testing.

100% inspection

EXHIBIT B

DELIVERABLES

Deliverable Frequency Medium/Format Submit

To

Pre-Inspection Activity Report and Dive Plan.

1 time for each MPS service event at each Lock & Dam.

Email copy of submittal in MS- WORD or ADOBE PDF to COR at least 30 days in advance of regularly scheduled maintenance and service work.

COR

Post- Inspection Activity Report.

1 time for each MPS service event at each Lock & Dam.

Email copy of submittal in MS- WORD and underwater video documentation using JPM format on Read Only CD to COR within 10 days after completion of regularly scheduled maintenance and service work.

COR

Parts list and parts specification for each Lock & Dam facility.

1 time for each MPS service event at each lock, and 1 time following any physical upgrades or alterations

Email copy of submittal in MS- WORD or ADOBE PDF to COR within 10 days after completion of regularly scheduled maintenance and service work.

COR

ADS4

Maintenance- Documentation of Lock & Dam Specific Programming and Hardware needs.

1 time for each MPS service event at each lock, and 1 time following any upgrades or alterations

Email copy of submittal in MS- WORD or ADOBE PDF to COR within 10 days after completion of regularly scheduled maintenance and service work.

COR

Design Documentation Report for Each Lock & Dam

1 time for each MPS service event that requires upgrades or alterations

Email copy of submittal in MS- WORD or ADOBE PDF to COR within 10 days after completion of regularly scheduled maintenance and service work.

COR

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the Contract becomes the basis for the Contracting Officer’s actions.

RATINGS

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. The following ratings shall be used:

A numerical scale with numbers 1 through 10 where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent.

DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

The Government shall document positive performance. A report template is attached. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee payments, award fee payments, or other actions.

UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and present it to the contractor's task manager or on-site representative. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor must present this corrective action plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

During contract/order performance, the COR shall take periodic measurements, one visit every task order as specified in the AQL column of the Performance Standards Summary Matrix, and shall analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COR shall meet with the contractor once to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment. Email copy of submittal in MS- WORD.

1 time for each lock and each Report to be provided 10 days after completion of regularly scheduled review period and accepted by USACE.

2 Digital Disks Copies of accepted Design Documentation Report in PDF and MS- Word Format