17-Q-0005_WAFB_Steam_Heat_Plant_Atch_6,_QASP_23Feb17.pdf

FA4625-17-Q-0005 BASE HEAT PLANT SERVICES - QASP

QUALITY ASSURANCE

SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

HEAT PLANT OPERATION

AND

MAINTENANCE SERVICES

23 February 2017

WHITEMAN AFB, MO

1. OVERVIEW. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) details how the Heat Plant Operation and Maintenance Services contract will be monitored from award throughout its lifecycle.

This plan establishes methods of surveillance and details how this assessment process will be conducted. Included is what will be monitored, how monitoring will take place, who will conduct monitoring, and how the results will be documented.

2. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this contract is to provide Whiteman Air Force Base (WAFB), MO with Steam Heat Plant Services meeting the criteria listed within the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The QASP provides the structure for the Government’s surveillance of the contractor’s performance to assure that it meets contract standards listed in the PWS, specifically the key performance objectives identified in the Service Deliver Summary (SDS). Implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards shall be outlined in the contractor’s Quality Control Plan (QCP).

3. GOALS. The goal of this QASP is to ensure that contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. A Multi-Functional Team (MFT) will be formed to manage this contract, with each role outlined to ensure understanding. The QASP is a living document; flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance. Ultimately, this QASP should facilitate open communication regarding the performance of this contract.

4. AUTHORITY. Authority for the issuance of this QASP is provided under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), current edition. FAR Part 46, Quality Assurance, “prescribes policies and procedures to ensure that supplies and services acquired under Government contract conform to the contract’s quality and quantity requirements.” Additionally, the use of the prescribed contract clauses within the FAR provide the MFT with guidance for the “inspection, acceptance, warranty, and other measures associated with quality requirements.”

5. MFT MEMBERS AND RESPONSIBILITES. The following personnel will oversee and coordinate surveillance activities:

Contracting Officer (CO) Contract Administrator (CA) Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC) Primary and Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs) COR Supervisor/Manager Contractor Representatives

5.1. MFT Roles and Responsibilities. The MFT is comprised of individuals/stakeholders who are responsible for the acquisition throughout the life of the requirement. The MFT roles and responsibilities are derived from and are IAW AFFARS MP 5301.602-2(d) Designation, Assignment, and Responsibilities of a Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and the DoDI 5000.72, DoD Standard for Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) Certification. Team member roles are identified and are described below:

5.1.1. Contracting Officer (CO): The duties of the CO are as follows:

1. Designates the COR, via the COR Designation Memorandum, with the authority of oversight of the contract.

2. Ensures contractor compliance with the terms of the contract.

3. Facilitates MFT meetings.

4. Approves all COR documents in the Contracting Officer Representative Tracking

(CORT) tool.

5. Terminates a COR designation upon completion of COR services.

6. Determines the final assessment rating of the contractor’s performance for the annual

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report (as required).

*As a reminder - The CO is the only person authorized to obligate Government funds.

5.1.2. Contract Administrator (CA): The duties of the CA are as follows:

1. Prepares and processes modifications to the contract.

2. Assists the CO in ensuring contractor performance meets the contractual standards.

3. Records and transcribes minutes for meetings.

4. Ensures CORs provide timely input of contractor surveillances into the CORT tool.

5. Acts as a liaison between the CO and COR.

5.1.3. Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC): The duties of the QAPC are as follows:

1. Facilitates COR training in regards to duties/responsibilities, performance requirements, conflicts of interest, unauthorized commitments, ethics and integrity, and the Services Acquisition Process.

2. Utilizes CORT to track CORs training, reports, and contracts.

3. Monitors CPARS to ensure contractor past performance ratings are reported timely.

5.1.4. Contracting Officer Representative (COR): The duties of the COR are as follows:

1. Reviews and understands contract terms and conditions that apply to their assigned

COR duties and responsibilities.

2. Provides continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance.

3. Performs inspections and provides acceptance for the Government assuring performance/delivery is in accordance with the contract requirements, terms and conditions.

4. Promptly reports to the CO, in writing, any performance issues/delays by the contractor.

5. Informs the CO, in writing, of any needed changes to the PWS or QASP.

6. Establishes and maintains a COR file that accurately transcribes the contractor’s actual

(not perceived) performance.

7. Uploads surveillance records and reports into the CORT tool.

8. Provides an annual performance assessment of the contractor to the CO/CA for the

CPARS annual reporting.

*As a reminder - The COR should never delegate or re-delegate any COR duties. Additionally, the COR should never misrepresent the limits of their authority in dealings with the contractor, nor take any action which may constitute, or appear to constitute, an informal agreement or unauthorized commitment. A COR may be held personally and financially liable for any unauthorized acts.

5.1.5. COR Supervisor/Manager: The duties of the COR Supervisor are as follows:

1. Notifies the CO of any necessary changes to the COR designation, to include termination of the COR.

2. Affirms that the COR will be afforded necessary resources (time, supplies, equipment, opportunity) to perform the designated functions.

3. Reviews contractor performance documentation and the COR file, to ensure performance is compatible with contract and mission objectives.

4. Neither delegates nor re-delegates any COR responsibilities that were designated to the

COR by the CO.

5.1.6. Contractor Representatives: The duties of the contractor are as follows:

1. Complies with the terms and conditions of the contract.

2. Participates in the post-award management phase and MFT meetings as requested.

3. Maintains and implements a QCP that compliments the performance requirements in accordance with the PWS.

4. Submits reports/deliverables, as required, in accordance with the PWS.

5. Tenders to the Government for acceptance only those supplies or services that conform to contract requirements (IAW contract FAR clause 52.246-4, Inspection of Services - Fixed- Price).

6. Recommends any changes that will promote efficiency or eliminate unnecessary costs.

6. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT. This section identifies the processes that measure success towards achieving identified performance objectives within the performance thresholds in the SDS and achieving the objectives/goals developed in the PWS and this QASP.

6.1. Surveillance Approach. The intent of this plan is to primarily rely on the contractor’s internal QCP, changing the Government’s role from “oversight” to “insight”. The contractor’s original surveillance approach may not stay the same throughout the duration of the contract; therefore, the Government should be prepared to periodically update the surveillance approach when necessary.

The goal of this surveillance approach is to gain confidence in the contractor’s way of doing business and then adjust the level of insight to a point that maintains that confidence.

6.1.1. Quality Assurance (QA). The Government will inspect and evaluate the contractor’s performance to ensure services are received in accordance with requirements set forth in this contract. The COR will use the methods contained within this QASP for inspection of the contractor and will document those results, validating that contract requirements have been met.

Results of the validation then become the official Air Force record of the contractor’s performance. When a performance threshold has not been met or contractor performance has not been accomplished, the COR will initiate and provide the CO a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) for issuance to the contractor.

6.1.2. Quality Control. This QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions to successfully meet the terms of this contract. The contractor shall utilize its own internal QCP to ensure services are performed in accordance with commonly accepted commercial practices and the PWS.

Should there be instances of recurring unsatisfactory performance, the contractor’s QCP and supporting documentation shall be made available to the Government upon request. The COR will verify the key performance objectives and subsequent thresholds in addition to other contract requirements are being performed in accordance with the applicable standards.

6.2. Service Delivery Summary (SDS). The SDS details the methods of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect the contractors performance. In addition, the SDS should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist. Inspection will be documented and placed within the COR file and the CORT tool. The SDS elements are described below:

6.2.1. Performance Objectives. Defines the desired outcomes.

6.2.2. PWS Paragraph. Lists the location in which to find the correlating PWS reference.

6.2.3. Performance Thresholds. Defines the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective.

6.2.4. Remedy. Defines the steps utilized to correct unsatisfactory performance.

6.2.5. Method of Assessment. Defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance.

The following chart identifies the key performance objectives that will be verified as contractually compliant by Government personnel; however, inspection of any contract requirements is authorized.

SERVICE DELIVERY SUMMARY

Performance Objective PWS Paragraph Performance

Threshold Remedy Method of

Assessment

Safe start up, operation, and shut down of equipment

2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.1.2, 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.3, 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.4, 2.5.1

100% Immediate correction

100% Inspection

Maintain and submit schedules, reports, records, logs, data bases, spreadsheets on plant and distribution system

2.4.1, 2.4.1.1, 2.4.1.2, 2.4.1.2.1, 2.4.1.3, 2.4.1.4, 2.4.1.5, 3.1.3,3.2.5, 4 inclusive, 6.1.3, 11.1, 11.2.5, 12.3 inclusive, 12.5.4, 12.6, 12.11, 12.14, 12.15, 12.18, 12.19

80% One (1) day to correct

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Water testing and treatment

2.6 inclusive, 13.3.5 90% One (1) day to correct

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Operational Efficiency 2.5 inclusive 90% Within eight (8) hours

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Perform scheduled and preventive maintenance, inspection, and repairs as scheduled

3, 3.1, 3.1.2, 3.2, 3.2.2 inclusive, 3.2.3, 3.2.3.1, 3.2.4, 3.2.4.1, 3.2.4.2, 3.2.8.2, 3.2.8.2.1, 3.2.8.2.2, 12.11, 12.14

90% One (1) day to correct

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Environmental compliance

6.3, 12.4, 12.5 inclusive 80% One (1) day to correct

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Safety compliance 3.2.7.1.3, 6.3, 8.2.1, 9.2, 12.3, 12.5.4,12.10, 13.2.2, Appendix A

100% Immediate correction

100% Inspection

Perform corrective maintenance

3.1.1, 3.2.6, 3.2.6.1, 3.2.7, 3.2.7.1, 3.2.7.1.1, 3.2.7.1.2, 3.2.8.3, 3.2.8.3.1, 12.14, Appendix A

100% Immediate correction

100% Inspection

Emergency shut down of Distribution system

2.3 inclusive, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.8.3.2, 8.4

100% Two (2) hours

100% Inspection

Distribution System Maintenance to include scheduled shut down of entire systems or specific areas for maintenance

2.1.2, 2.3, 2.4, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.1.1, 3.2.2.2, 3.2.2.5,3.2.6, 3.2.7, 3.2.7.1, 3.2.7.1.1, 3.2.7.1.2, 3.2.7.1.3, 3.2.7.1.4, 3.2.8.2, 3.2.8.3, 3.2.8.3.1, 3.2.8.3.2, 12.14

90% Within eight (8) hours

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

6.3. Methods Used to Assess Contractor’s Performance. The COR will use the following methods to evaluate the contractor provided services:

6.3.1. 100% Inspection Surveillance. The COR will use this method of inspection on a requirement every time it occurs. Use of this technique is appropriate when contract requirements have critical impact on mission of safety, occur infrequently or have stringent requirements.

6.3.2. Periodic Validation. The COR will use this type of assessment by selecting samples (tasks) for evaluation on other than 100% inspections or on a statistically random basis. For example, periodic surveillance could be performed on a daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly inspection schedule and the COR will choose the location and time on other than a random basis.

The COR will submit the surveillance schedule to the CO/CA the month prior to the month being inspected, and place the schedule within CORT. The schedule will show the time, date, location, and item(s) that will be inspected. Any changes to the schedule will be submitted to the CO/CA when the change occurs. The surveillance results and findings are to be submitted to the CO/CA and uploaded to the CORT system NLT the 10th of the following month.

6.3.3. Customer Complaints. The COR will use this method to fully validate information obtained through other sources for performance in any area. Any personnel that observe questionable services should immediately contact the COR. Questionable services may include:

incomplete performance, unperformed services, or services performed improperly.

The COR will receive, document, and validate or invalidate all complaints. After review of the complaint, the COR will coordinate with the complainant for additional details, if needed. If a complaint is found to be valid the COR will notify both the CO and the contractor in writing.

Should the contractor challenge the validity of any complaint, and the COR and contractor cannot come to agreement, the complaint in question will be forwarded to the CO for resolution. The COR will fully document the resolution for each complaint.

Complaints will be tracked and if the performance standard is exceeded, the COR will notify the CO in writing. Sequentially, the CO will notify the contractor and take appropriate action. The process will accommodate and document positive feedback as well.

6.4. Remedies.

6.4.1 Remedies for Unsatisfactory Performance. The CO will be notified by the COR, in writing, of any unsatisfactory inspection (defect) results. The contractor shall re-perform the service after notification from the CO. IAW the PWS, failing to meet the performance threshold as outlined in the SDS, for any of these performance objectives in any one month period, will result in a warning or letter of concern from the CO. All remedies shall be IAW FAR 52.212-4 (a), Contract Terms and Conditions - Commercial Items, Inspection/Acceptance.

6.4.2. Remedies for Recurring Unsatisfactory Performance. IAW the PWS, failing to meet the performance threshold as outlined in the SDS of these performance objectives in any combination for two or more consecutive or non-consecutive months during a contract period will constitute an immediate progress meeting with the MFT.

6.4.3. Notification and Discrepancy Reporting. The COR will notify the contract manager of contract performance status and alert them of any discrepancies annotated during the COR’s inspection/surveillance. This notification is for discrepancy correction only and does not indicate concurrence to the discrepancy by the contractor. The COR will also notify the CA of all discrepancies noted during the inspection/surveillance. The frequency and method of notification to the CA will be provided to the COR during contract specific training.

7. CONTRACT MANAGEMENT. Contract management allows for the collection of measurement information that is both documented and tracked. This information helps to ensure completion of agreed upon goals and encourages positive change in systems and processes.

Moreover, the data ensures that the Government can allocate and prioritize resources. Managers are aided in their decisions to either confirm or change current policy or program directions to meet those goals by using the measurement results. The following areas identify where measurement information is documented and tracked:

7.1. Market Research. On-going market research is conducted to ensure the contract requirements remain current with commercial standards and industry performance evaluation methods.

7.2. Contracting Officer Representative Tracking (CORT) Tool. The CORT website is a DoD electronic depository listing all of the CORs, COR management, and CO’s information. The website contains contract surveillance schedules and reports, QASPs, training certificates, and COR designation and termination letters. It is located on the Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) website at:

https://wawf.eb.mil/. Further guidance on using this tool is provided in OUSD (AT&L) memorandum, dated February 10, 2014, Update to the Department of Defense Contracting Officer Representative Tracking Tool.

7.3. WAWF/iRAPT. Certification of services is performed by the COR via the WAWF system. At the end of each billing period, service provider inputs invoice information in the WAWF system.

WAWF automatically notifies appropriate COR via email of pending invoice. COR accesses WAWF and verifies accuracy of service provider’s data. If data is correct, COR certifies invoice and payment is conducted by Defense Finance Accounting System (DFAS). If COR encounters errors in service provider’s invoice, COR consults with on-site contract manager to mutually rectify data. If service provider disagrees with COR, issue will be forwarded to the CO for resolution.

A declining balance worksheet will be utilized to track funding on all service contracts at a “per- CLIN” level. In addition to ensuring the contract has sufficient funding to pay for the contracted services, the COR will coordinate with each unit’s respective Resource Advisor to ensure any and all excess funding remaining at the end of each option period is de-obligated.

7.4. COR Records Review. The CO will perform, with participation of the COR and COR supervisor, a yearly administrative review of the COR's online file during the anniversary month of appointment. Upon completion, the CO will document the results on the COR file annual checklist, and upload the review into the CORT Tool.

7.4.1. Contract Files. An inspection file must be developed and maintained by the primary COR. IAW DFARS PGI 201.602-2 (d)(vi), the COR shall maintain an electronic file in the CORT Tool for each contract assigned. This file must include, as a minimum:

1. A copy of the contracting officer's letter of designation and other documentation describing the COR's duties and responsibilities; and

2. Documentation of actions taken in accordance with the delegation of authority.

Further guidance regarding folder contents is located within DoDI 5000.72, enclosure 6.

7.5. Performance Feedback via CPARS. The COR is required to document, evaluate, and report contractor’s performance IAW this QASP. On an annual basis, the CA will use the COR surveillance documents, reports and input to complete a narrative summary of contractor’s performance in the online Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). The CO will then validate the CA’s identified rating and submit the finalized rating within CPARS. The CPARS website is located at https://www.cpars.gov/. The CA/CO will need to accomplish an out-of-cycle CPARS report for any significant change in performance.

The CPARS performance element descriptions and performance rating criteria are defined below:

PERFORMANCE ELEMENTS

Performance Element

Description

Quality of Service

Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety health standards).

Schedule

Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, and delivery schedule, administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or effect the schedule variance).

Business Relations

Assess the integration and coordination of all activities needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s history or reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts, and whether the contractor met small/small disadvantaged and woman owned business participation goals.

Management of Key Personnel

Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing, when necessary, key personnel.

PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Performance Rating

Criteria

Exceptional (Green)

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many of the Government’s benefits. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good (Green)

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some of the Government benefits. The contractual performance element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Satisfactory (Green)

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

Marginal (Yellow)

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects 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 (Red)

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

7.6. Acquisition of Services Process.

7.6.1. Initial Contract Performance Review. IAW AFI 63-138, para. 6.4.1, the initial contract performance will be reviewed by the MFT within 30 days after the contractor assumes full performance responsibility. The purpose of the review is to determine if the contractor has successfully started performance, completed transition, is fully operational, and is within the estimated cost, schedule, and performance parameters of the contract. The MFT’s review will be documented, identifying any negative information concerning contract execution and any corrective actions necessary. The CO can waive the initial 30 day review if the contract is awarded to the incumbent.

7.7. Changes. Requested changes to this QASP will be submitted in writing through the CO.

REVIEW & ACCEPTANCE

The following MFT member signatures indicate their review and acceptance of the QASP for Base Custodial Services. These signatures indicate coordination on this QASP at the time of development. No further MFT coordination is needed unless the intent of the QASP is changed.

BRIAN MUNLEY JAMES MCCOY

509th CES COR Management Contracting Officer

JERALD BELFORD JULIE ANDERSON

Contract Administrator QA Program Coordinator

JOHN OLMEDA ROGER WILLIAMS

COR (Primary) COR (Alternate)

ANDERSON.JULIE.ELIZ

ABETH.1255048410

Digitally signed by

ANDERSON.JULIE.ELIZABETH.1255048410

DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USAF, cn=ANDERSON.JULIE.ELIZABETH.1255048410 Date: 2017.02.23 16:04:42 -06'00'

BELFORD.JERALD.WALTE

R.III.1408510224

Digitally signed by BELFORD.JERALD.WALTER.III.1408510224 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USAF, cn=BELFORD.JERALD.WALTER.III.1408510224 Date: 2017.02.24 09:37:37 -06'00'