Enclosure 4 ROME QA Surveillance Plan.pdf
PDF 256 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DRAFT RFP - Repairs, Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering (ROME) Services - DRAFT RFP Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 80GSFC22R0011-DRFP
About this file
This draft request for proposal (RFP) solicits offers for repairs, operations, maintenance, and engineering (ROME) services for facilities at the Goddard Space Flight Center and Wallops Flight Facility. The contractor shall provide facilities support services including facilities operations and maintenance, architect-engineering, construction, and facilities information resources. Facilities include office buildings, technical facilities, laboratories, launch facilities, an airfield, and warehouses supported by utilities. Custodial work is excluded. The contractor shall provide these services at GSFC in Greenbelt, Maryland, Wallops Flight Facility in Wallops Island, Virginia, and all associated GSFC sites.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
DRAFT RFP - Repairs, Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering (ROME) Services - DRAFT RFP has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
DRFP 80GSFC22R0011, ENCLOSURE 4
GOVERNMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE
PLAN
REPAIRS, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND ENGINEERING
(ROME)
CONTRACT NO.
05/12/2021
FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY (10/2015) Enclosure 5
FOREWARD
Under performance-based acquisitions such as this, the Contractor assumes more responsibility and greater risk in exchange for more flexibility and less direct Government involvement in contract activities. However, the Government still has a responsibility to conduct surveillance.
Surveillance spans a spectrum of Government involvement. Surveillance may be as simple as inspecting a delivered support or service at acceptance or as complex as continually monitoring contractor performance. To meet this responsibility, the Government needs to understand the risks involved in the Contractor's activity and how the Contractor is managing those risks.
This Government Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan has been prepared to describe the Government’s surveillance of this contract. It is a “living” document that will be tailored to the contractor selected. The Government welcomes suggestions for improving this Plan. Of particular interest are ideas on what information the Government should monitor (i.e., metrics) and how the Government can most cost-effectively obtain the relevant performance data it needs.
Repairs, Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (ROME)
GOVERNMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this Government Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to define the overall approach the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) intends to use to monitor and survey Contractor onsite performance under the ROME Contract No. TBD. This QASP defines the process the Government expects to follow to obtain data, evaluate the Contractor, and determine if contract performance conforms to contract requirements. The goal is to balance the level of Government surveillance with perceived impacts and risks associated with performance hereunder. The QASP can be changed unilaterally by the Government at any time during the contract.
GSFC plans to utilize a surveillance team to evaluate Contractor performance and direct surveillance activities. The team will establish and rely on objective and subjective performance metrics based on the contract Statement of Work (SOW) and task orders issued thereunder to evaluate Contractor performance against requirements.
The QASP is a Government-developed surveillance tool prepared in accordance with FAR 46.4 and NFS 1846.4. It shall not be included in the contract, per NFS 1846.401(a)(iii), but provided to the Contractor for informational purposes only.
1.2 Scope
This QASP identifies the program requirements, strategies, resources, review and control processes, surveillance activities, and metrics for continuous measurement of Contractor performance. This plan provides effective and systematic surveillance methods for evaluating the Contractor services, processes, and products provided under this contract. The Government may evaluate work at any time during the Contractor’s work performance.
The intent of the QASP is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with acceptable quality levels and the Government receives the quality of services and products called for in the contract. This QASP does not detail how the Contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the Government, is responsible for managing its quality controls and ensuring that performance meets the terms of the contract. The role of the Government is quality assurance to ensure contract standards are achieved.
The QASP is intended to be a “living” document and will be updated as required and defined in this document.
This plan is applicable to all services performed or products provided by the ROME Contractor.
Throughout this QASP, the term “Contractor” is used. In terms of this plan, it should be known that unless explicitly stated, the term “Contractor” is applicable to both the ROME Contractor and all of its subcontractors.
The surveillance program shall be a collaborative and integrated effort that includes all areas of contract management, including the following:
a. Customer Service
b. Quality Control (QC)
c. Work Order and Task Order fulfillment
d. Documentation
e. Procurement/Subcontracting/Purchasing
f. Cost Reporting
g. Property
h. Safety and Health
i. Security
1.3 Program Definition and Contract Description
1.3.1 Program Background and Definition
The Facilities Management Division (FMD) at GSFC, Code 220, plans and directs the Center's overall facilities program to provide a physical plant that meets the needs of the Center’s research, development, and operational programs. FMD directs the overall operation and maintenance, engineering and construction of buildings, utility systems, grounds, roads, and other infrastructure.
1.3.2 Contract Goals and Objectives:
The GSFC goal for this contract is to provide Facility Operations and Maintenance, Engineering, Construction and Information Resources Services for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), and NASA HQ.
1.4 Guiding Directives
The guiding documents for this surveillance effort include the Contract SOW including appendices, Task Order requirements and deliverable requirements. The contract identifies general requirements and the Task Orders identify specific objectives or results required for each issued Task Order.
1.5 References and Applicable Documents
a. NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.4, NASA Engineering and Program/Project Management Policy
b. NPR 7120.5, NASA Space Flight Programs and Project Management Requirements
c. NPR 7120.7, NASA Information Technology and Project Management Requirements
d. NPR 8735.2, Management of Government Quality Assurance Functions for NASA Contracts
e. NPR 8820.2, Facilities Project Requirements
f. NPR 8831.2, Facilities Maintenance and Operations Management
g. Goddard Procedural Requirements (GPR) 5100.2, Supplier Performance Evaluations
h. GPR 5100.4, Supplier Assessment Process
i. GPR 7120.4, Risk Management
2.0 SURVEILLANCE STRATEGY AND APPROACH
2.1 General
Surveillance can range from oversight to insight. The strategy and approach to surveillance by GSFC for the ROME contract, as detailed in this plan, is one that concentrates primarily on insight rather than oversight. Regardless, the Government reserves the right to initiate additional surveillance activities (insight or oversight) on an ‘as-needed’ basis, based upon circumstances and data collected (adverse trends, negative data points, lack of corrective action, etc.) via the surveillance activities defined in this plan.
The level of risk and the impact of failure are major determinants in helping define the type of surveillance to be conducted. Clearly, if the impact of failure is minor and the level of risk is low, only a minimum of insight-driven surveillance would normally be needed. Conversely, if the impact of failure could be significant and the level of risk is high, more extensive surveillance (including possible oversight surveillance) is warranted.
This insight-based approach to surveillance will utilize and leverage the Contractor's Quality Control Plan (QCP) and Quality Management System (QMS). Definitions, requirements, and specifications contained in the contract, SOW, and referenced documents will establish a baseline for the surveillance activities. This insight-based approach will seek objective evidence and data that the Contractor's program and processes are functioning as intended in accordance with the terms of the contract. The focus will be on trusting the Contractor's QMS, and verifying that the Contractor is performing according to the policies, procedures, plans, and processes defined by their QMS.
GSFC will strive to use an insight-driven surveillance approach throughout the performance of this contract. The overall surveillance goal will be to obtain objective evidence and data that enable the Government to determine whether the Contractor's program and processes are functioning as intended in accordance with the terms of the contract. The focus will be on prevention rather than detection, i.e., emphasizing controlled processes and methods of operation, as opposed to relying solely upon inspection and test to identify problems.
This insight-based approach to surveillance as applied to the contract will result in lower levels of Government intervention, thus allowing the Contractor to assume full accountability and responsibility for integrity of processes. Although less obtrusive than oversight, this insight-based approach to surveillance continues to provide the Government with visibility into the Contractor's programmatic processes, technical processes, progress, and issues at all levels.
As required by FAR 42.1502 and GPR 5100.2, Supplier Performance Evaluations, the Contracting Officer (CO), in collaboration with the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), will annually complete a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation, which will also be reviewed by the Contractor, and become a part of the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).
2.2 Surveillance Activity Limitations and Guidance
2.2.1 General
Surveillance of the ROME contract will be conducted on a non-interference basis and in a manner that will not unduly delay work being performed by the Contractor.
2.2.2 Insight
Insight is an assurance process that uses performance requirements and, if definable, performance metrics to ensure process capability, product quality and end-item effectiveness.
Insight relies on gathering a minimum set of product or process data that provides adequate visibility into the integrity of the product or process. The data may be acquired from Contractor records, usually in a non-intrusive parallel method.
Insight as applied to this contract will result in lower levels of Government surveillance and allow the Contractor to assume increased responsibility and accountability for the integrity of processes. Insight will rely heavily on evaluating planned contract deliverables, performance standards, and existing Contractor procedures and working documents, if available.
2.2.3 Oversight
Oversight as applied to this contract will result in higher levels of Government surveillance. The Government will gather information pertaining to the Contractor’s process through on-site involvement and/or inspection in the process and will monitor the process itself. The Government’s involvement in the Contractor’s performance, through oversight, will be as given in Agency procedural requirements and industry standards.
2.3 Surveillance Organization and Resources
2.3.1 General
The activities detailed in this plan will be supported and performed by a group of individuals, many with differing levels of responsibilities, but all maintaining a level of consistency in terms of the surveillance strategy, approach, and activities in general. Specific entities supporting the ROME contract surveillance activities include the identified NASA GSFC personnel; Contractor QC program personnel (including their subcontractors); and contractor support services and delegated agency personnel, if applicable. Each of these entities and their associated responsibilities/input to the surveillance activities on ROME contract are described in the following paragraphs.
2.3.2 Surveillance Team
2.3.2.1 General Organization and Responsibilities
General organization and responsibilities of the Surveillance Team are as follows:
a. The surveillance team will be composed of key Government personnel. All surveillance activities will be implemented using NASA and NASA support-contractor personnel.
The surveillance team may be composed of:
1. GSFC Procurement Personnel (i.e., CO, Contract Specialist)
2. GSFC Program Personnel (i.e., COR, Task Monitor(s) and Technical Monitor(s), and
Resource/Financial Analyst(s));
3. GSFC Safety, Health and Environmental Personnel;
4. Security Personnel (both physical and Information Technology (IT) Security);
5. GSFC Property Administrator Personnel;
b. The team’s primary purpose will be to provide direction for contract surveillance activities and to serve as the Government’s focal point in reviewing and evaluating overall Contractor performance under the ROME contract. The team will obtain information from various sources, including deliverable Contractor documents, communications with the Contractor, and reports by other personnel or representatives (e.g., Task Monitor(s) and Technical Monitor(s); Safety, Health, or Security personnel;)
who interact with the Contractor.
c. NASA GSFC has the responsibility for independently assuring that the Contractor's operations meet NASA's contract performance requirements and enable success. As such, surveillance team members will have open access to all areas in which this contract is being performed and will interface directly with their ROME counterparts. The team will document problems, concerns and issues, and take note of Contractor accomplishments. They will collect performance metric data, where applicable, and will participate in Contractor review meetings, such as those described herein. Information will flow from individual team members through the COR to surveillance team representatives, who will present issues and achievements at surveillance team meetings.
Information gained from these formal and informal exchanges of ideas and collection of data will be compiled and evaluated as a continuous measure of contract performance.
d. All available information will be evaluated, and any action by GSFC will be determined based upon the scope and magnitude of any particular issue or problem. The surveillance team chairperson, the COR, will formally notify the CO of situations where it is perceived that the Contractor has failed to take prudent corrective or preventive action, for situations that increase risk, or of findings of continued contractual non-compliance.
2.3.2.2 ROME Contracting Officer
ROME CO responsibilities are as follows:
a. The CO is responsible for ensuring performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensuring compliance with the terms of the contract, issuing task orders, and safeguarding the interests of the United States in its contractual relationships. Within the surveillance area the CO takes inputs from the Program/Project managers, COR, GSFC Safety and Mission Assurance Office, and others to establish the detailed surveillance requirements to be performed by NASA personnel, or to be performed under contract by a surveillance support Contractor. The CO will also assure that the Contractor receives impartial and fair treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.
b. The CO will complete an annual Contractor performance assessment report using the
CPARS that will also be reviewed by the Contractor and become a part of the PPIRS.
2.3.2.3 ROME Contracting Officer’s Representative
ROME COR responsibilities are as follows:
a. The COR is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized technical representative to assist in administering the contract. The COR monitors the technical work performed under the contract, evaluates Contractor performance, serves as the primary interface for the Contractor and the CO for all technical matters, reports on contract status to Program/Project Management, and recommends corrective action when necessary. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments, authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf, or in any way direct the Contractor to operate in conflict with the contract terms and conditions. Any changes that the Contractor deems may affect the contract or task order value, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The COR’s limitations of authority are contained in the NASA Form 1634, COR Delegation.
b. The COR assumes full responsibility for directing the surveillance activities identified in this plan. The COR also trains Task Monitor(s) and Technical Monitor(s) on evaluation procedures for evaluating contractor performance.
c. The COR will assist the CO in the completion of the contract’s annual performance assessment report using CPARS.
2.3.2.4 Task Monitors
GSFC Task Monitors are individuals appointed by the COR for developing Task Orders, reviewing the Contractor’s Task Plans and Task Order reports, and monitoring Task Order performance. Task Orders will include quantitative metrics, as appropriate. Task Monitors provide detailed technical oversight of the Contractor’s performance and report findings to the COR in a timely, complete and impartial fashion. While the Task Monitors may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, the Task Monitors are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.
2.3.2.5 Technical Monitors
GSFC Technical Monitors are individuals appointed by the COR for the oversight of specific technical work on the contract. Technical Monitors provide detailed technical oversight of the
Contractor’s performance and report findings to the COR in a timely, complete and impartial fashion. While the Technical Monitors may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, the Technical Monitors are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.
2.3.2.7 ROME Contractor Quality Control
It is expected that the Contractor will maintain a QC lead as part of its QMS and that the QC lead will perform QC-related activities for the ROME contract efforts. The Contractor's QC lead will serve a vital role in the success of the surveillance efforts detailed in this plan. In particular, it is expected that the Contractor will task its QC lead to serve as a focal point for the Government in several areas including but not limited to provision of and access to all requested insight data/lifecycle-related assets and artifacts as they pertain to the insight areas described in this plan, and all QC-related activities conducted by this group.
The Government expects that as necessary and applicable, the QC lead may direct the Government to other groups/individuals supporting the ROME contract effort in order to obtain requested insight data. These groups/individuals may include the Contractor's Program/Business Management office and/or representatives, discipline engineers, Configuration Management representatives, etc.
2.4 Forms of Surveillance
2.4.1 General
Surveillance on ROME contract will be performed using any of the primary surveillance forms applied to the insight areas described in Section 3 of this document, during applicable stages of the contract. These primary forms of surveillance are described below.
2.4.2 Communications
Communications is a general surveillance activity. Communications is a two-way process and includes both written and oral communication. Examples of written communications activities that may be used in conducting surveillance include:
a. Exchanges from the Contractor to the Government of plans, procedures, quality records, reports, etc., and/or provision of read-only access to repositories which retain these items.
b. Exchanges from the Government to Contractor of letters, reports, review results, etc.
c. Ad hoc information submitted by the COR and/or Task Monitor(s) and Technical
Monitor(s) to the CO related to the Contractor’s electronic mail.
Examples of oral communications activities that may be used in conducting include:
a. Informal telephone calls, teleconferences.
b. Informal verbal inquiries, discussions, engineering consultations.
c. Working group meetings, IPT participation, technical/status briefings, progress reviews, technical information meetings, and formal and informal reviews.
d. Informal discussions.
2.4.3 Management Reviews and Reporting
Examples of management review and reporting activities that may be used in conducting surveillance include:
a. Formal, process, and progress reviews
b. Review of contract deliverables
c. Documentation of problems, issues and concerns
d. Data collection reporting
e. Review of task order deliverables, products, and documentation
3. SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES
3.1 General
There exist specific insight areas that the Government and the Contractor shall concentrate on during applicable stages of contract performance. Each of these insight areas and the Government’s expectations for these areas are described in Table 1.
Table 1. Surveillance Insight Areas
Area of Risk Identified Impact to Government Surveillance Team Activity System Maintenance and Availability
System downtime or loss of functionality could result in loss of service to the user community
Review Contractor-developed maintenance plan for improvements. Review data and trouble data. Review corrective action performance.
Information Technology (IT) Security
Computer Security: Potential corruption and loss of data;
disruption of schedule
Annual review of IT security plans and contingency test results and controls.
Review compliance with policies, firewalls, protection software, vulnerability scans and external systems.
Property Management, Control, and Maintenance
Loss of or damage to equipment;
potential schedule impact
Review Contractor property management techniques, compliance with policies, and record-keeping.
Safety Loss of work-time or equipment, with schedule or cost impact
Evaluate compliance with the Contractor's Safety and Health Plan and safety requirements.
Technical Documentation and Control
Loss of knowledge of processes and results
Periodically sample documents (review for accuracy) and ensure they are under CM control.
Quality Management Technical, cost, schedule, safety, and program success
Monitor the Contractor’s internal and external audits for compliance with the Contractor’s Quality Control Plan.
Quality of Work Force a. Inability to fill positions and meet commitments on scheduled deliverables or science results, including NASA Performance Metrics
b. Additional cost resulting from decreased productivity of other staff reliant on unfilled positions
c. Lack of expertise or inadequate experience in key areas
a. Monitor time required to fill positions and evaluate Contractor efforts and approaches used to fill vacancies.
b. Assess Contractor efforts to train staff in areas of required expertise.
c. Evaluate Contractor technical performance
Quality of Workmanship (End-Items)
a. Additional cost and time resulting from rework, nonconforming, latent defects
a. Conduct/witness testing and inspections, when necessary. Ensure end-item deliverables conform to specifications, established protocols, industry standards, prior to acceptance.
Schedule Services or products not provided in a timely manner can impact project schedule and cost
Monitor progress via management reviews and reporting.
Cost and Funding
Cost Overrun:
a. Inability to implement contract requirements within negotiated costs may lead to erosion of technical performance, delay, or deletion of work
b. Reduction of work due to funding limitations/fluctuations
Monitor and track costs incurred through the NASA Form 533, NASA Contractor Financial Management Report submitted on a monthly and quarterly basis, as well as EVMS reporting.
Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) Avoidance
Potential restrictions, ineligible to perform, and/or unfair competitive advantage on future work
Monitor submittal, enforcement and compliance with the Contractor’s OCI Avoidance Plan.
Environmental Environmental damage to local and remote sites
Conduct periodic inspections to ensure compliance with environmental requirements.
TBD (as designated on individual Task Orders)
TBD (as designated on individual Task Orders)
TBD (as designated on individual Task Orders)
3.2 Surveillance Team Activities
The surveillance team members will participate in review meetings, as necessary. They will provide support with the development and approval of technical requirements. They will also maintain insight into the Contractor’s compliance with relevant deliverables submitted under the contract and services performed. When the Government has concerns regarding Contractor performance, surveillance team members may conduct independent audits of the Contractor’s activities, processes, products, documentation and data, in order to provide assurance that the program is being implemented according to all requirements and specifications. These audits will normally be conducted with advance notification and coordinated with the Contractor.
However, the Government reserves the right to conduct unscheduled audits when evidence indicates that Contractor performance is deficient.
The following selected surveillance team activities will be performed by various surveillance team members during applicable stages of contract performance:
3.2.1 Work Area/Floor Checks
The surveillance team members will make a physical inspection of the Contractor's onsite work area semi-annually. In addition, the COR may make informal inspections, as required. These inspections are made to assure compliance with NASA and GSFC regulations and procedures regarding:
a. All onsite Contractor employees have a GSFC Personal Identify Verification (PIV) card (badge).
b. The total number of Contractor employees provided onsite office space.
c. The Contractor’s office space is physically separated from the Government’s workspace and is properly identified by a sign with the contractor employee & company’s name clearly displayed.
d. The names and locations (buildings/room numbers) of the Contractor employees match their monthly onsite Personal Identity Verification (PIV) Report.
e. The Contractor knows who the building's Facilities Operation Manager (FOM) is, and what his/her functions are.
f. The Contractor is familiar with the building emergency evacuation procedures.
g. The Contractor employees are aware that work area checks may be conducted at any time.
h. The Contractor is familiar with NASA and GSFC Policy Directives and Procedural
Requirements as it pertains to ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001:2000 or AS 9100 governing onsite performance. These procedures can be accessed via the following NASA Online Directive Information System Website: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/.
i. The Contractor is aware of the appropriate protection procedures for handling Government planning data and other Contractor confidential or financial data.
j. The Contractor employees are aware that the use of Government telephones is for official business only.
k. The Contractor employees are following the proper Checkout Procedures when leaving GSFC (e.g., returning PIV card (badges), Government property, library books). The PIV data forms will be checked against the monthly Onsite Reports to identify exiting employees.
l. The Contractor employees are aware of the NASA and GSFC IT Security compliance requirements.
m. The Contractor employees are aware of the Contractor’s OCI Avoidance Plan and the appropriate Non-Disclosures.
In addition to checking conformance with NASA and GSFC regulations listed above, the COR may make periodic checks of the Contractor's workspace to assess adequacy of facilities, equipment, and materials.
3.2.2 Work Review and Performance Monitoring
The COR, with the assistance of the Task Monitor(s) and Technical Monitor(s), will perform the following functions to evaluate the Contractor's performance:
a. Reviews specific SOW areas with the Technical Monitor(s) to assure that work being performed and deliverables are in accordance with the technical requirements of the SOW, and timely.
Reviews individual Task Orders with the Task Monitors to assure that each Task Order is technically within the scope of the contract and its personnel requirements and schedule are within the Contractor's capabilities. Reviews Contractor Task Plans to ensure that performance estimates are acceptable and that all milestones and deliverables have been identified.
b. Reviews the Contractor's monthly Progress Report for accuracy and completeness.
Consult with the Task Monitor(s) and Technical Monitor(s), as necessary, to assess the fidelity of reports.
c. Meets monthly, or more often if required, with the Contractor's Program Manager to discuss overall contract management and performance, review staffing and schedule issues, and review cost related issues.
d. Certifies the Contractor’s invoices for payment in accordance with NASA procedures.
e. Perform QA inspections and QA witnessing/monitoring of tests.
f. In the event of a discrepancy in the Contractor's performance, the COR promptly notifies both the CO and the Contractor's Program Manager and arranges a meeting to rectify the situation.
3.2.3 Government Property Administration
The COR will carry out the following functions.
a. Review Contractor's request to purchase controlled property and facilities and make recommendations to the CO.
b. Validate that no property or facilities are being acquired without the CO's prior approval.
c. Review and approve Contractor's requests for acquisitions of supplies from Goddard's store stock.
d. Validate that all Installation-Accountable Government Property (IAGP) is being properly utilized and maintained.
e. Conduct periodic inspection of equipment and its location, compared to the data on the property records.
f. Validate that all existing and new equipment is properly tagged.
g. Validate that Government property is made available in accordance with the terms of the contract.
h. Validate that the Contractor does not modify or provide additional facilities, plant equipment, or real property, except as specifically required by the contract, or as directed or approved in writing by the CO.
3.2.4 Performance Monitoring
The COR will ensure that employer–employee relationships do not occur between Government and Contractor personnel. This is achieved if the following is adhered to:
a. Only the Contractor interviews prospective employees.
b. Only the Contractor’s Program Manager assigns work directly to the employees.
c. Only the Contractor approves timecards and absences.
d. Government personnel do not interfere with the Contractor regarding personnel and administrative prerogatives.
3.2.5 Safety
The responsibility for meeting all safety requirements rests with the Contractor. Surveillance team safety engineers and technical personnel will review Contractor-generated hazard analyses, safety compliance data packages or other safety-related documentation, as appropriate, to help ensure all safety requirements have been satisfied. Surveillance team personnel will also maintain insight into the Contractor’s safety activities through the review of the Contractor’s submitted Safety and Health Plan, and updates, as required by this contract.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .