Atch_1_QASP_DECC_COL_B10_Furniture__Carpet_Replacement.docx

DOCX document 49 KB Posted

Attached to
Procure furniture and carpet for DECC Columbus, OH
Solicitation number
HC102815T0188
Issued by

About this file

Attachment 1 QASP

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Attachment_A_revised_with_phases.pdf PDF
Attachment_4_-Columbus_B10-Exist.pdf PDF
Questions_Responses_HC102815T0188_Furniture_carpet_Columbus.docx DOCX document
HC1028115T0188_Amd_03.docx DOCX document
Attachment_3_Site_Visit_Information_revised_7312015.docx DOCX document
HC102815T0188-AMD02.docx DOCX document
Attachment_3_Site_Visit_Information.docx DOCX document
Attachment_A_PWS_-_HC102815T0188.pdf PDF
HC102815T0188-AMD01.docx DOCX document
HC102815T0188.docx DOCX document
Attachment_2_Pricing_Sheet_HC102815T0188.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Show all 11

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract or Task Order Title: DECC Columbus, Building 10 – IE72 & IE73 Furniture and Carpet Replacement

2. Work Requirements:

· Task 1 – Project Schedule, Existing Conditions, Proposed Layout and Close-Out Documents

· Task 2 – Furniture

· Task 3 – Specific Installation Task

3. Primary Method of Surveillance: There will be Customer Input, Layout Review and Periodic Inspection for Task 1. There will be 100% inspection of Task 2 and Task 3.

· 100 Percent Inspection. This is usually only the most appropriate method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

· Random Sampling. This is usually the most appropriate method for recurring tasks. With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained. Computer programs may be available to assist in establishing sampling procedures.

· Periodic Inspection: These services are monitored weekly, monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually, etc. Periodic types of activities are perfect for periodic inspection because not only are they infrequent, but there is normally a predetermined, specified time frame within which the tasks must be accomplished. Therefore, you know exactly when to conduct the evaluations. Periodic inspections automatically become 100 percent evaluations or "100 percent checks." Inspections should be divided and scheduled by frequency: annual, semiannual, quarterly, monthly, weekly and as required. Sometimes services are required for which the time or frequency cannot be predicted, such as accident investigations, one-time special tasking by higher headquarters, etc. These would be labeled "as required inspections." Others are known and predictable such as the quarterly status report or the monthly travel report currently included in some DISA service contracts.

· Customer Input. Although usually not a primary method, this is a valuable supplement to more systematic methods. For example, in a case where random sampling indicates unsatisfactory service, customer complaints can be used as substantiating evidence. In certain situations where customers can be relied upon to complain consistently when the quality of performance is poor, e.g., dining facilities, building services, customer surveys and customer complaints may be a primary surveillance method, and customer satisfaction an appropriate performance standard. In all cases, complaints should be documented, preferably on a standard form.

4. Scope of Performance: The selected vendor will be required to craft a design that meets the criteria provided in this PWS. Purchase and install electrical equipment as described

5. Performance Standards:

Performance Standard
Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)
Method of Surveillance
6.1.1 Subtask 1- Project Schedule
Project schedule meet the period of performance and PWS.
Review of proposed schedule
6.1.3 Subtask 3 – Proposed Furniture Layout
Proposed solution meets the requirements of the PWS, Proposed Concept Floor Plan and code requirements.
Routine inspection of deliverable products and services.
6.1.4 Subtask 4 – Close-Out Documents
Submittal includes all warranties, complete as-built drawings and installed equipment list
100% inspection of submitted documents
6.3.1 Subtask 1 – Installation Schedule
Revised Project Schedule (as required) to meet the period of performance and PWS.
Review of proposed schedule
6.3.2 Subtask 2 – Demolition of Existing Furniture
Completely removed and disposed of existing furniture
Random sampling inspections of work area and contractor’s disposal process.
6.3.3 Subtask 3 – Remove Existing Carpet Flooring
Completely removed and disposed of existing carpet
Random sampling inspections of work area and contractor’s disposal process.
6.3.3 Subtask 3 – Furniture Installation
Proposed solution meets the requirements of the PWS and Proposed Concept Floor Plan.
Random sampling inspection of installed products

6. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items: The contractor will provide initial proof of compliance with regulatory and compliance items contained in the contract. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer (KO) will evaluate the initial submission and will conduct ad hoc reviews of the contractor's compliance throughout the remainder of the contract. The contractor will monitor compliance as required by FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, and report any issues to the KO.

7. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):

· 100% equipment provided and functioning as required.

· No major deficiencies noted.

· On time

8. Evaluation Method:

The customer will randomly check on the installation and during the phases. At the close-out of the project, a walkthrough will be completed to verify that the installation was properly done and that there are no deficiencies. Any existing deficiencies shall be noted and will be addressed in a timely manner.

9. Incentives (Positive and/or Negative): None

Enclosure 6, Page 1 of 2 Pages 17Jul2013/Version 2

Enclosure 6, QASP Page 1 of 1 Pages v4/10 Feb 15

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .