B08 Attachment 3 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.docx

SYNOPSIS/SOLICITATION

W91ZLK-22-R-0002

Attachment 3 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

Preventative & On-Call Maintenance of Hazardous Waste Storage System at the Chemical Transfer Facility

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to ensure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the Preventative & On-Call Maintenance of Hazardous Waste Storage System at the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Headquarters (DEVCOM HQ) Chemical Biological Center (CBC) Chemical Transfer Facility (CTF). The intent of this plan is to ensure that the contractor performs their work in accordance with the project tasks identified in their proposal. By extension, the plan also makes sure that the Government receives a quality ‘best effort’ by the selected contractor to accomplish the tasks required under the task order award.

This QASP describes how the Government will observe, evaluate and document the contractor’s performance in meeting the requirements identified in the task order award. Specifically, the QASP will identify the methods for monitoring performance and determining the quality level of services and products delivered under the task order award. The intent is to establish and execute a QASP that will assist the Government in obtaining a maximum quality effort.

2.0 RESPONSIBILITIES

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

Contracting Officer – The Contracting Officer will monitor performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting to ensure compliance with the terms of the task order award. It is the Contracting Officer that assures the contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the task order award. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract award and assures proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. 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.

3.0 SURVEILLANCE

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will perform surveillance through 100% inspection of the work performed.

4.0 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

4.1 Overview. This PRS summary identifies the services required by the PWS over which the Government will exercise surveillance.

4.2 Performance Evaluation. Performance of a service will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the performance threshold. Conducting a meeting with all relevant parties at no additional cost to the Government is the preferred method for addressing the plan to correct unacceptable performance. The contractor shall provide the Government a written response as to why the performance threshold was not met, how performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how recurrence of the cause will be prevented in the future.

4.3 Performance Objectives, Standards, Thresholds, and Surveillance Methods. The services required by the contractor are summarized into performance objectives along with the minimum standards 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 REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Task

Performance Objective(s) Method of Surveillance

Incentive / Disincentive

Incentive – Compliance with internal procedures and Army regulations.

Disincentive - Reports to customer. Termination for default. Possible poor performance evaluations.

100% inspection

Incentive – Compliance with internal procedures and Army regulations.

Disincentive - Reports to customer. Termination for default. Possible poor performance evaluations.

AS PER FAR 46.309: INSPECTION OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (APR 1984)

The Government has the right to inspect and evaluate the work performed or being performed under the task order award, and the premises where the work is being performed, at all reasonable times and in a manner that will not unduly delay the work. If the Government performs inspection or evaluation on the premises of the Contractor or a subcontractor, the Contractor shall furnish and shall require subcontractors to furnish all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safe and convenient performance of these duties.

The evaluation ratings are as follows:

Excellent (E) – Performance significantly exceeds the Government’s requirements. Numerous performance strengths are identified which significantly benefit the Government. No performance deficiencies or weaknesses are identified.

Good (G) – Performance exceeds the Government’s requirements. Performance strengths are identified which benefit the Government. No performance deficiencies exist. Performance weaknesses may exist, but they have been corrected or are being resolved without substantial impact on performance, cost, or schedule.

Satisfactory (S) – Performance meets the Government’s requirements. No performance deficiencies exist. Performance weaknesses may exist, but they have been corrected or are being resolved without substantial impact on performance, cost or schedule.

Unacceptable (U) – Performance does not meet the Government’s requirements. Performance deficiencies exist. Actions taken to correct performance deficiencies have not been successful, and recovery is not likely.