PRB_Case_Number_027_Attachment4_QASP.docx

H. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure systematic quality assurance methods are used in this performance based service contract. The Contractor shall perform in accordance with the QASP performance metrics, and the Government shall receive the quality of services identified in the contract. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this acquisition.

This contract provides for propellant removal and washout to ensure successful reclamation of M26 Rocket Motor components, and the re-graining and testing of rocket motors to achieve process validation. The resulting performance based contract will have cost plus fixed fee Labor CLINs. The period of performance for this contract will cover 18 months. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the overall objectives of this procurement.

2. AUTHORITY

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3. SCOPE

The QASP is put in place to provide Government surveillance and oversight of the Contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract.

The Contractor’s performance on this contract will be evaluated by the Government as described below and summarized in the Contractor Self-Assessment Milestone Chart. The first evaluation will cover the period ending six months after date of contract award, with final evaluation being performed at the completion of contract (18-month period of performance). The evaluation will encompass all work performed by the Contractor during the assessment period, but will not include cumulative information from prior assessment. The Contractor will complete a self-assessment of the work performed, to be delivered to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the Contract Administrator, as identified in the contract, No Later Than (NLT) 60 days after the end of the assessment period. The self-assessment shall cover all areas of the Government QASP. Based on the evaluation results, provided by the COR and the Contract Administrator, the Contracting Officer will assign an overall performance rating. A final assessment shall be completed by the Government within four months of the completion date of the contract.

BASE

Month 2

Month 3

Month 4

Month 5

Month 6

Month 8

Month 9

Month 10

Month 11

Month 12

Month 13

Month 14

Month 15

Month 16

Month 17

Month 18

Contractor Self Assessment Reporting Due Date

*PD = Period

4. GOVERNMENT RESOURCES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

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

Procurement Contracting Officer – The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interest of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the PCO that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance. The PCO for this contract is identified in Section G.

Contract Administrator – An individual assigned by the PCO to assist in the daily administration of the contract. The Contract Administrator also provides input to the PCO and the COR as to the quality of performance for areas addressed in this QASP. The Contract Administrator for this contract is identified in Section G.

Contracting Officer’s Representative – The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for technical administration of the contract 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 PCO for action.

Government Technical Point of Contact – The COR designates an individual Government Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to assist in administering specific projects under the contract. The Government TPOC is responsible for assisting in administering a specific project under the contract. A Government TPOC cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the contract, make commitments or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf.

5. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

a. QASP – The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used by the COR in the technical administration and the PCO/Contract Specialist in non-technical administration of this QASP.

b. Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – The market place for information technology, engineering, and management support services is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this contract. Additionally, an evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed at the end of each year of performance. For this procurement, the Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, and other important areas. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and the continuation of the contract, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool with the QASP.

6. DOCUMENTATION

In addition to providing annual reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the quality assurance function. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the contract.

7. SURVEILLANCE

The tables below set forth the performance ratings, standards, outcome and surveillance methods to document the results of the surveillance on an annual basis, as well as interim and informal reviews (i.e., In-Process Reviews (IPRs)) on a more frequent basis.

(a) Performance Ratings: The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s performance of the PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS) and the Contracting Officer will assign one of the following ratings:

(1) Excellent

(2) Satisfactory

(3) Unsatisfactory

The standards associated with these ratings are given in the following Table 1:

Table 1: Overall Performance Ratings

(b) Objectives/Determination

1. Interim/Informal

Interim/Informal performance evaluations will be provided to assess performance at each IPR.

2. Annual

The PCO will make a performance determination at the end of each evaluation period. The determination will be based upon the COR’s recommendations, the Contractor’s comments, including any Self-Evaluation Report, and any other information deemed relevant by the PCO. The PCO shall resolve disagreements between the COR’s recommendations and the Contractor’s comments/report regarding the evaluation. The PCO’s performance determination is unilateral and final. The PCO will document the determination and provide a copy to the Contractor within 30 days of receipt of the Contractor’s self-assessment.

Table 2: Objectives

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition.

(c) Performance Evaluation Criteria. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the criteria and standards provided for each objective and identified in Tables 3 through 5 of this contract QASP.

(d) Organization. The performance evaluation organization consists of the PCO, who will serve as the Determining Official, and the COR. In some instances, a TPOC will be assigned to the contract in addition to the COR.

(e) This performance evaluation does not replace any other requirement for evaluating Contractor performance that may be required by this contract such as a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report or other required reports.

Table 3: Task Performance Evaluation Criteria and Standards

Table 4: Performance Requirements Summary Table

PWS Task Area

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Typical Monitoring Methods

Thirty (30) warhead assemblies will be demilitarized and scrapped.

3.1.1-3.1.4

Thirty (30) loaded rocket motor subassemblies shall be inspected for foreign object debris before propellant removal and washout.

Thirty (30) reclaimed rocket motor cases shall be visually inspected for condition. After visual inspection and drawing conformance assurance, each rocket motor case shall be pressure tested for acceptance IAW the requirements of the U.S. Army TDP. Following pressure test acceptance, the external paint shall be removed from the case. The case assembly shall be subjected to magnetic particle inspection. The condition of each motor case shall be documented IAW DI-MISC-80508 (A013) within 90 days and the cases shall be placed in temporary storage. The contractor shall notify Government if less than 80% of the 30 rocket motors or less than 80% of the 30 nozzle assemblies pass acceptance testing and are suitable and safe for re-use.

Acceptable nozzles shall show no galling or other visible damage to threads and meet all drawing tolerances, including for roundness and straightness.

The contractor shall notify Government if it becomes evident that the igniter mount cannot be removed without breakage, prior to removal. The contractor shall assess fabrication options or alternate sealing methods for Government acceptance if igniter mounts are not able to be removed intact and reused.

Acceptable motor cases shall show no galling or other visible damage to threads and meet all drawing tolerances, including for roundness, straightness, and proper spin lug position.

A yield of less than 24 acceptable rocket motor cases, or less than 24 acceptable nozzle assemblies shall prevent continuing to Phase 2. However, higher rates are preferable.

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, timeliness and review of methods and procedures and effectiveness of solutions.

The bondlined case assemblies shall have the casting mold assembly tooling installed IAW established procedures and the U.S. Army TDP. Casting will be accomplished for this single lot of twenty-four (24) mold assembled rocket motor units using propellant from a single production scale mix. Following completion of the reclamation of twenty-four (24) M26 Rocket Motor assemblies, six (6) assemblies shall be subjected to the testing as defined in MIS-30130

Hardware items meet requirements specified IAW U.S. Army supplied TDP. Deliverables are accurate, complete, error free and effective in meeting the Government’s stated objectives.

Government shall be notified before continuing to Phase 3 if any of the rocket motors fail acceptance inspection and testing, or if any thrust test data results do not fall within the acceptable range of MIS-30130 Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, timeliness and review of methods and procedures and effectiveness of solutions.

, conduct flight testing with assets subjected to temperature conditioning per MIS-30130 and collect data from the flight tests and provide a report to the Government IAW DI-NDTI-80809 (CDRL A010).

Table 5 entitled: “COST EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND STANDARDS”, shall be included when the contract will be cost-reimbursable.

TABLE 5: COST EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND STANDARDS