Att_J-20_QASP_AMD_0005_20160129.docx

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) For NAWCAD Naval Test Wing Atlantic (NTWL) Squadrons VX-20, VX-23, HX-21, and Unitesd States Naval Test Pilot School (USNTPS) Aircraft Maintenance Support and Modification Services

1. Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the performance-based contract. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics, the Government receives the quality of services required under the contract and that the actual performance results are documented in accordance with this plan.

This QASP describes how the Government will observe, evaluate and document the Contractor’s performance in meeting the critical performance standards identified in the contract. Specifically, the QASP will identify the Government resources responsible for monitoring performance and surveillance methods that will be utilized in determining the quality level of services and products delivered under the contract. The intent is to establish and properly execute a QASP that will assist the Government in obtaining services from the Contractor.

This contract requirement is for aircraft maintenance and support services for Naval Test Wing Atlantic, VX-20, VX-23, HX-21, and the US Navy Test Pilot School. The contract will be for one base-year and four (4) one-year options. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

2. Authority

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

3. Scope

To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between Quality Control Plan (QCP) and the QASP. The Contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions (QCP) necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract.

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

4. Government Resources The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

4.1 Contracting Officer - A person duly appointed with the authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting Officer) (PCO) or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer) (ACO) contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract is AIR-2.5.1.12. The ACO will be designated in the resulting contract. Contracting Officers are designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority.

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

5.1 Contracting Officer – The Contracting Officer will monitor performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting to ensure compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the Contracting Officer that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance

5.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative – The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. In addition to the continuous monitoring of performance, the COR will also submit an annual assessment in the Navy’s Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). For CPARS, the COR assesses general quality of the product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, small business compliance, and other important areas. 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.

5.3 Aviation Program Team (APT) Oversight - APT members ensure Contractor quality by conducting routine surveillance of all Contractor maintenance and ground operations through regularly scheduled and unannounced audits, monitors, inspections and Contractor demonstrations of Contractor processes, procedures and tasks when performing maintenance activity and ground operations under this contract. APT personnel who perform QA oversight and members of the APT who provide oversight of ground operations may be the same personnel if qualified to perform both functions.

5.4 Squadron Maintenance Officer (MO) - The MO ensures the APT performs required data collection, analysis, and maintains a site continuity book (record retention) to include current copy of task order, letters of delegation (as necessary), the site QASP, training, training certificates, a CAR log, copies of CARs (via electronic management system), and other pertinent information needed for proper APT oversight of Contractor. Development of a continuity book (record retention system) which contains the information above is REQUIRED and will be kept for a minimum of 12 months after contract completion.

5.5 Government Flight Representative (GFR) - The GFR leads the APT and has contract administrative support (CAS) responsibility for ensuring Contractor compliance with NAVAIRINST 3710.1G requirements, executing the APT surveillance plan to support this QASP and maintaining liaison with Contractor management. APT personnel ensure a quality product is delivered by conducting surveillance of Contractor activities for compliance of requirements mandated under the Aircraft Ground and Flight Risk Clause (GFRC) contained on the contract. As required, the GFR, supported by the APT, is responsible for the implementation and execution of an APT surveillance plan. NOTE: The GFR works in cooperative agreement with squadron maintenance leadership to ensure the APT is actively involved in the day to day surveillance of Contractor ground operations. The APT audits and monitors the Contractor’s ground operations and maintenance procedures to ensure safe operations and adherence to contractual requirements.

6.1.3 APT Surveillance Plan: The surveillance of Contractor performance and the evaluation of that performance against the contractual requirements as they relate to the Ground and Flight Risk Clause (June 2010) contained within the contract. APT Surveillance of the Contractor will adhere to the APT surveillance schedule unless notified by the Government for additional requirements. An Annual GFR survey will be performed at a minimum rate of one survey every 12 months in addition to their surveillance of the Contractor. The GFR may choose to use the APT’s cumulative audits/monitors to count as the survey or may request (through the NTWL MO) NTWL’s Staff to conduct a stand-alone survey based on the degree of risk and magnitude of potential Government loss associated with the types of aircraft flight and ground operations.

6.2 The APT is responsible for monitoring the compliance and effectiveness of the Contractor’s safety and quality control programs. Any/all required Contractor QA inspections may be witnessed by APT personnel. In-process inspections are specific Contractor QA functions required during the performance of Contractor maintenance requirements and actions where satisfactory task performance cannot be determined after the task has been completed. These inspections include, but are not limited to, witnessing of: application of torque, functional testing, adjusting, assembly, servicing, and installation. Certain maintenance tasks, if improperly performed, could cause catastrophic equipment failure jeopardizing the safety of personnel. Lead APT GGR/QAR shall randomly select SFF maintenance actions they oversee (SFF maintenance actions may be directed by the squadron’s MO/GFR). Items the APT GGR/QAR is responsible, at minimum, to verify include: Contractor QAR was present for the required maintenance action(s); the torque wrench/calibrated tools/gauges (if required) are/is within their calibration dates and the stickers were not torn/missing; the IETMS/technical publication was present and used; a FOD search was conducted; panel closure was completed and the tools were inventoried and accounted for. The surveillance of Safety of Flight items will be used to evaluate quality and safety of work being performed. Contractor Quality Assurance shall notify the APT prior to the accomplishment of in-process and final inspections of Safety of Flight Items for random surveillance. Surveillance of the inspections will be documented utilizing a surveillance checklist for record retention.

6.3 Surveillance Methods:

6.3.1 Audits: The purpose of an Audit is to provide information as to the acceptability of a Contractor’s process to meet requirements and/or desired results and/or to show procedural or contractual non-compliance. Audit results can be used to provide insight to where specific monitors and/or inspections can be conducted to determine process compliance, without conducting a complete repeat of the audit process. Quality auditing is concerned with three general types of audits.

-System Audits: A quality system audit is a documented activity performed in accordance with written procedures or checklists to verify (by examination and evaluation of objective evidence) that applicable elements of the quality assurance program have been developed, documented, and effectively implemented in accordance with specified requirements.

-Process Audits: An audit verifying/evaluating a manufacturing or test operation against a documented set of instructions and/or standards. These instructions and/or standards shall be used to measure conformance to standards and the effectiveness of instructions. Such an audit is used to validate conformity of a process, personnel and equipment such as time, temperature, pressure, composition, amperage, component mixture, etc. Process Audits are used for adequacy and effectiveness of the process controls over the equipment and operators as established by procedures, work instructions, and process specifications.

-Product Audits: A product audit is the examination, inspection or test of a product that has been previously accepted for the characteristics being audited. Such an audit is a re-inspection and retest of the product that has already been accepted or a review of documented evidence of acceptance. It includes performing operational tests to the same requirements used by manufacturing. The audit will measure the level of product conformance to specified standards of workmanship, performance, and quality. It is an indicator of quality going to the customer, and should be conducted from the customer's point of view. This type of audit frequently includes an evaluation of packaging; examination for cosmetic flaws; check for proper documentation and accessories such as proper tags, stamps, shipment preparation, and protection. The audit may involve a check of accuracy of the tests, test equipment, and test procedure.

6.3.2 Inspections: This method of surveillance will be directed by the MO, GFR or Lead ATP Supervisor on a case by case basis. Inspections (normally conducted by the Contractor) require the greatest exercise of personal judgment on the part of the inspector. This type of inspection is generally for the purpose of detecting cracks, seams, missing paint, color finish, missing parts, holes not drilled, etc. Inspection is the method used to verify the physical characteristics of the product (size, weight, appearance, adherence to specified standards and engineering practices, quality of design, and construction) by examining the equipment in comparison with associated documentation. Inspection determines conformance to requirements without the use of special test equipment or analysis techniques. Inspections normally fall into one of the following categories:

-Receiving Inspections apply to material, components, parts, equipment, logs and records and documents. The inspections are normally conducted by Contractor QA to determine the condition of material, proper identification, maintenance requirements and disposition, and accuracy of accompanying records and documents.

-In-process Inspections are specific Contractor QA functions required during the performance of maintenance requirements and actions where satisfactory task performance cannot be determined after the task has been completed. These inspections include, but are not limited to, witnessing application of torque, functional testing, adjusting, assembly, servicing, and installation.

-Final Inspections are specific Contractor QA functions performed following the completion of a task or series of tasks. Inspections may be performed during any assembly stage of the product. An example of verification by inspection is measuring the physical dimensions of a chassis. Inspections are different from analysis in that inspections can typically be performed by QA whereas analysis usually requires system engineering.

-Monitors are a method used to spot check program processes vice conducting a complete audit. Questions are selected from the audit checklist to evaluate a Contractor’s use of their program guidance/process. The results can be used to detect positive and negative trends and whether or not specific programs need more surveillance than the required timelines.

-Demonstrations are a method used to verify that an item conforms to the specified requirements by observing the operation and functional performance of the product, or part of the product, generally without the use of special instrumentation to record quantitative measurements. This method is generally used when a requirement does not contain a specific numerical parameter that may be measured. Since no quantitative values are specified for demonstrations, pass/fail criteria are “yes/no” indications of functional performance. An example of verification by demonstration is verifying that a component provides status data.

7.0 Corrective Actions:

7.1 This QASP is a coordinated, transparent document that has been vetted and agreed to by both the Government and the Contractor. If, during the execution of this QASP, any Contractual Non-compliance is noted, the Contractor will be notified as soon as possible.

7.2 The MO or GFR are authorized to reject all Contractor work not accomplished in accordance with the contractual requirements. The type and extent of corrective action to be taken depends on the nonconformance in terms of severity, frequency, and previous corrective actions. It is essential that all Government oversight personnel pursue enforcement of all contractual requirements. When contractual non-compliances are detected, corrective action must be initiated by utilizing a Corrective Action Report (CAR) issued within 1 working day of discovery. A verbal notification of intent to submit a CAR must be made to the NTWL Maintenance Officer within 12 hours of discovery. If the MO is unavailable, notify one of the following (in this order) NTWL’s: GFR, Maintenance Master Chief, GGR, Assigned Squadron CPO, or COR.

7.2.1 CAR documentation will be provided on a NTWL GFR generated form (Series XXX). All updates or changes to the CAR documentation form will be through the NTWL GFR.

7.2.2 Non-compliance issues should be resolved at the lowest possible level, but if the Contractor is non-responsive, the CAR will escalate to a higher level of authority. If at any time contractual non-compliance is noted and it is safety related, the Contractor work being performed at the time may be stopped and Contractor will be notified immediately of the issue. Any unsatisfactory Contractor performance or non-compliance with contract/contractual requirements will be noted; a Corrective Action Request (CAR) will be drafted with an appropriate CAR level and submitted to the MO and GFR for infractions of the witness events and APT Surveillance Plan. All CARs shall be documented. Level I CARs may be issued verbally with the artisan to correct the minor non-compliance on the spot, but all level I CARs must be logged in the APT’s CAR Log for tracking purposes. In all cases, Level I CARs must be discussed with the Group Manager or Quality Manager. If a Level I CAR has repeated non-compliance, a Level II CAR shall be written at the discretion of the squadron MO or GFR and documented on the NTWL approved CAR Form. All written CARs will require the Contractor to identify the root cause of the deficiency, action taken to correct the specific deficiency, action taken to prevent recurrence, action taken to determine if other products/aircraft are affected by same/similar deficiencies, and the date when the corrective action will be implemented. Normally, the Government will not write a CAR if the Contractor discovers the discrepancy within their own processes. The Contractor will not submit an internal CAR for aircraft or equipment damage. The incident resulting in damage will be documented by a Government CAR.

7.3 CARs will include dates, times, equipment and personnel etc. involved with the observations concerning the event and shall be assigned one of the four CAR levels listed below. In all cases of aircraft or equipment damage, photos must be emailed to NTWL’s MO, GFR, GGR and Maintenance Master Chief.

- CAR Level I – Issued for contractual noncompliance requiring no special management attention to correct (however, they will be notified as stated above). These CARs can normally be corrected in a timely manner, documented locally and generally require no further corrective action. Documentation is shared with CONTRACTOR and maintained within the CAR log and the squadron’s Monthly Status Report. This level CAR will not be routed to the Wing Staff.

- CAR Level II – Issued when contractual nonconformity is more serious than a Level I CAR or is a result of multiple issuances of a Level I CAR for similar reasons and cannot be immediately corrected. Level II CARs are written requests for corrective action for contractual noncompliance that could adversely affect cost, schedule, or performance if not corrected in a timely manner. Noncompliance associated with Safety of Flight Items shall be issued at this level or higher. Level II CARs will be directed to the Contractor management for corrective action. Documentation for Level II CARs is shared with CONTRACTOR using a CAR form and maintained within the surveillance plan schedule. Level II and above CARs must be routed to the Wing Staff.

- CAR Level III – Issued to bring attention to serious contractual nonconformities and/or repeated noncompliance involving issuance of a previous CAR of the same nature. A Level I or II CAR, however, does not need to be issued before a Level III CAR can be generated. Prior to issuance of any Level III CAR, however, it must be coordinated with the PCO via the MO, GFR, COR. Once coordinated, Contractor Senior Management will be notified by the PCO. Documentation for Level III CARs is shared with CONTRACTOR using a CAR form and maintained within the surveillance plan schedule. A copy of the CAR form will be provided to the PCO via the COR. Contractor top management may be notified by the PCO that continued inaction may lead to more severe measures and that a Level III CAR may be coupled with contractual remedies such as reductions of progress payments, cost disallowances, cure notices, show cause letters (manual or electronic), or business management systems disapprovals etc.. A copy of Level III CARs and all subsequent correspondence must be provided to the buying activity. All affected contract administration team members (including DCAA and buying activities as appropriate) should be kept informed of the status and disposition of Level III requests.

- CAR Level IV – Issued when contractual remedies such as suspension of progress payments or product acceptance activities, termination for default, and suspension or debarment, in accordance with FAR/DFARS policies and procedures are being considered. A Level IV CAR can be issued on-its-own or after the issuance of a previous CAR has been shown to be an ineffective remedy to the contractual noncompliance. Level IV CARs shall be issued to Contractor top management by the cognizant ACO after coordination between the PCO, COR, MO and GFR. A copy of Level IV CARs and all subsequent correspondence must be provided to customer buying activities and proper coordination and/or notification among ACOs, Districts, Headquarters, customers, and other affected Government activities of Level IV CARs is required. The PCO, in conference with the MO, GFR and COR will determine the appropriate level of CONTRACTOR management attention necessary to satisfy required follow-up corrective action(s).

7.4 A control numbering system shall be used, with the first four digits being the last four digits of the prime contract, the next four digits will be the calendar year (CY) , next the activity/command and the last three digits will identify the corrective action request (i.e., 0033-2017-TPS-001);

XXXX – Last four digits of the Contract Number TBA

CY - Calendar Year (i.e., 2016, 2017, 2018, etc.)

XXX –Command issuing the CAR

001 – First CAR for the Activity/Command for the calendar year

Note: Each activity shall use the following codes:

Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Twenty – VX-20 Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Twenty-One – HX-21 Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Twenty-Three – VX-23 Naval Test Pilot School – TPS Naval Test Wing Staff - NTWL

7.4.1 The APT shall document in the corrective action log the control number, the specific deficiency, Contractor personnel with whom the deficiency was discussed, the date the deficiency was resolved and the follow-up actions taken by the APT to verify the Contractor has ensured effectiveness of corrective actions taken.

7.4.2 The MO and GFR shall maintain a record of all CARs initiated (verbal and written, manual or electronic), action taken, and follow-up to verify implementation and effectiveness of the Contractor actions via a Corrective Action Log established for maintaining and tracking all Corrective Action Reports (CARs). A copy of this log is shared with the Contractor and shall be forwarded to the NTWL GFR quarterly.

8.0 Reporting Requirements and Record Retention

8.1 The COR Monthly Status Report shall be submitted via email to the COR by the 10th day of the following month. The overall order schedule and performance scores will be a simple average of the schedule and performance scores, respectively, from the individual squadrons. Once reviewed by the Government the report will be made available upon request. The Contractor will have 10 calendar days to protest COR Monthly Status Report scores with the final administrative decision to be made by the PCO.

8.2 Each APT will maintain a file which contains: audit and monitor results, GOP review/ verification, general area inspections, and product verification (i.e. safety of flight) inspections, GGR designation letters, QASP, training documentation and certificates, CARs and the CAR log. Particular emphasis should be placed on deficiencies and corrective actions, procedural disapprovals, and rejection of product. Surveillance records must be retained for a minimum of one year after completion of the end item. Records applicable to most recent proofing/re-proofing of each key process must be retained indefinitely.

9.0 Data Analysis

9.1 All inspection records, observations, monthly reports, CARs and other pertinent data will be reviewed monthly by the COR/APT to identify any trends in order to adjust surveillance activities. This does not preclude the necessity of adjusting surveillance due to specific incidents or deficiencies noted at any time. The review should include at a minimum a description of the data analyzed, a description of the conclusions/results, and actions planned/taken. These reviews will be documented and records maintained in the site continuity book.

9.2 Analysis of Results: at the end of the month, the APT will summarize all the information and compute the number of defects for each performance standard. The Contractor’s performance will be documented on the COR/APT Monthly Report.

9.3 If one or more standard is unsatisfactory, further evaluation is required to determine if the Contractor's overall performance is unsatisfactory. The APT will assess the results of each performance standard, taking into consideration the importance and criticality of each in relation to the total service being evaluated. The APT will document the overall evaluation for the service on the Evaluation Summary. The COR Monthly Report will be reviewed and signed by the Squadron MO then forwarded to the NTWL COR.

10.0 Suggested Action - The APT shall document in the corrective action log the control number, the specific deficiency, Contractor personnel with whom the deficiency was discussed, the date the deficiency was resolved and the follow-up actions taken by the APT to verify the Contractor has ensured effectiveness of corrective actions taken.

The COR is required to maintain overall visibility of all Level II CARs and above. The originator of a CAR shall follow up to verify the implementation and effectiveness of the Contractor’s actions and close out the CAR when appropriate. If the Contractor is not responsive to lower-level CARs, the squadron APT will notify NTWL and COR for escalation of the matter.

Revisions are the joint responsibility of the COR, MO/DMOs and PCO. The COR, MO/DMO and PCO, will review the QASP annually and will provide proposed changes to the Contractor and other Government entities for review if necessary. This document may be changed at any time upon review and approval by the COR, PCO and/or ACO and supported by the PBSOW.

13. NAVAL TEST WING ATLANTIC (NAVTESTWINGLANT)

13.1 NAVAL TEST WING ATLANTIC (NAVTESTWINGLANT) has responsibility for the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) functions, Aviation Program Team (APT) functions.

Points of Contact (POC):

COR – TBD

Primary APT –TBD

GFR – TBD

Correspondence should be addressed to:

NAVAL TEST WING ATLANTIC

ATTN: TBD

22541 Millstone Road Bldg 304 R207 Patuxent River, MD 20670-1606

14. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) – MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Enclosure (2) – DEFINITIONS FOR EVALUATION AREAS/RATINGS Enclosure (3) – INCENTIVES

Enclosure (1)

MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

1.1 United States Navy Test Pilot School (USNTPS)

SOW TASK DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE STANDARD AND ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL)

SURVEILLANCE METHOD

INCENTIVES

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure ready available aircraft (RA) for student flight curriculum by achieving monthly RA% of not less than as stated in paragraph 2.2.1 for each T/M/S group

APT verifies daily RA reports, averages RA percentages and enters on monthly RA report per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.2.1

See Enclosure (3)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure TPS students complete flight curriculum by having a MCX < 6.57 %

APT extracts flight data from FIST and compares maintenance cancellations to scheduled sorties weekly per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.2.2

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition with 3 or fewer repeat discrepancies that result in flight or ground abort

APT will pull discrepancy reports from FIST and NALCOMIS and monitor ADBs weekly per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.2.3

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition, minimize uncorrected discrepancies and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure uncorrected discrepancy (Up-Gripe) monthly Average of all T/M/S no less than 80% (per UGT formula)

APT will perform daily checks/counts daily and calculate and record per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.2.4

Enclosure (1)

MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

1.2 Air Test and Evaluation Squadron TWO ONE (HX-21)

SOW TASK DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE STANDARD AND ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure aircraft availability for mission by maintaining Monthly Ready Aircraft Availability Average of all T/M/S no less than 70%75% (based on DRATR formula)

APT calculates and reports monthly per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.3.1

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition, minimize uncorrected discrepancies and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure uncorrected discrepancy (Up-Gripe) monthly Average of all T/M/S no less than 80% (per UGT formula)

APT will perform daily checks/counts daily and calculate and record per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.3.2

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Maintain material condition of aircraft during Phase Inspections by having no more than 6 uncorrected discrepancies not to impact mission readiness at completion of Phase.

APT will review Phase completions and calculate and record outstanding discrepancies per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.3.3

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Maintain material condition of aircraft during 28 DayCorrosion Inspections by having less than 2.1 more prevention than treatment corrosion discrepancies at completion of Inspection APT will inspect/review and calculate and record 25% of all aircraft completing 28 day inspections per Enclosure(2), paragraph 2.3.4

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft to meet Daily Flight Schedule Commitment (DFS)

Ensure aircraft on line and configured for flight 1 hour prior to scheduled event to meet DFS commitments by attaining daily scores of 1 at no less than 95% (based on DFS formula)

APT records daily and averages for the month per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.3.5

Enclosure (1)

1.3 Air Test and Evaluation Squadron TWO ZERO (VX-20)

SOW TASK DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE STANDARD AND ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft to meet daily Flight Schedule Commitment (DFS)

Ensure aircraft on line and configured for flight 1 hour prior to scheduled event to meet DFS commitments by attaining daily scores of 1 at no less than 95% (based on DFS formula)

APT records daily and averages for the month per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.4.1

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure aircraft availability for mission by maintaining Monthly BUNO&T/M/S Average at no less than 80% (based on DRATR formula)

APT calculates and report monthly per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.4.2

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition, minimize uncorrected discrepancies and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure uncorrected discrepancy (Up-Gripe) monthly Average of all T/M/S no less than 80% (per UGT formula)

APT will perform daily checks/counts daily and calculate and record per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.4.3

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

At completion of Phase Inspection, major calendar and/or hourly inspection aircraft shall have no more than 5 uncorrected discrepancies not to impact mission readiness. Ensures aircraft availability and flight safety.

APT will review Phase and inspection completions and calculate outstanding discrepancies and calculate and record per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.4.4

Enclosure (1)

1.4 Air Test and Evaluation Squadron TWO THREE (VX-23)

SOW TASK DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE STANDARD AND ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft Ensure F/A-18 series (Project) aircraft availability for mission by maintaining RA at no less than 60% (based on RA definition in paragraph 2.5)

Calculated Monthly by APT personnel using AMSRR data (reference Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.5.1)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure F/A-18 series (Support) aircraft available for mission by maintaining RA at no less than 70% (based on RA definition paragraph 2.5)

See Enclosure (3)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure EA-6B aircraft available for mission by maintaining RA at no less than 60% (based on RA definition in paragraph 2.5)

Maintain/correct aircraft material condition and conduct quality programs to ensure safe flyable aircraft

Ensure daily uncorrected discrepancy (Up-Gripe) per aircraft for all T/M/S does not exceed 15

Calculated and reported per Enclosure (2), paragraph 2.5.2 See Enclosure (3)

Although each metric must have a whole number score (-1, 0, or 1), it is acceptable for the overall Performance or Schedule Average, as reflected on the Contractor Monthly Performance Report to be other than a whole number once averaged (i.e. -.5 or .75)

Enclosure (2)

DEFINITIONS FOR EVALUATION AREAS/RATINGS

2.1 This section describes the metrics used to measure Contractor schedule and performance. Using the COR/Quality Assurance Representative Monthly Report Form each squadron will measure and record if the Contractor “did not meet,” “met,” or “exceeded” the stated goals. Once measured, the form will automatically calculate a monthly score for the Contractor and record it on each squadron’s COR/Quality Assurance Representative Monthly Report Form. If there are no metrics for schedule, the grade will be left blank and no average will be calculated. Quarterly the scores will be averaged by the NTWL APT and COR, to be used for CPAR inputs. For example, there are four (4) squadrons each with a monthly Performance average. For one (1) quarter there are twelve (12) Performance averages which will be calculated for a quarterly average. The quarterly CPAR marks will be used to establish ratings for the annual CPAR submission. The adjectival ratings in the table below will apply to the quarterly and annual CPAR. (See QASP attachment for Monthly Status Report Form)

QUARTERLY/

ANNUAL AVERAGE

CPAR

PERFORMANCE RATING

Note: Normal Rounding Rules will apply The Contractor shall request exemption from a performance metric for reasons that are beyond the Contractor’s control. The Contractor shall request exemption using the “Relief from Performance Metric” form in §10 Log Reporting. Only the MO/DMO may determine that it is unreasonable for the Contractor to meet a performance metric.

Following metrics apply to each squadron and their Maintenance Performance Standards in Enclosure (1).

Enclosure (2)

2.2 United States Navy Test Pilot School (USNTPS)

U.S. Naval Test Pilot School (USNTPS) provides instruction to experienced pilots, flight officers, and engineers in the processes and techniques of aircraft and systems test and evaluation. The school educates and trains personnel from all U.S. military services, other U.S. Government agencies, and foreign nations. A new class starts every 6 months and each class of approximately 36 students undergoes a rigorous 10 month curriculum of academics and flight test training. The school also investigates and develops new flight test techniques, publishes manuals for use of the aviation test community for standardization of flight test techniques and project reporting, and conducts special projects. On average the school conducts over 6,000 flight hours and about 3,500 sorties a year.

Aircraft assigned to USNTPS consist of fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft. The aircraft will be configured with Tactical Air Combat Training System (TACTS) pods, Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) pods, Laser Detector Trackers (LDT’s), Air Intercept Missile (AIM-9) Captive Air Training Missile (CATM), external fuel tanks and luggage pods. Various air-to-ground practice weapons will be employed during student test pilot training and staff training flights. All configurations are dictated via the daily flight schedule.

Sortie requirements vary from month to month because the flight syllabus is directly tied to the academics program. The following table is provided for planning surge requirements and scheduled maintenance opportunities. This is informational and is ultimate objective for students to fly required flights to graduate as Test Pilots.

USNTPS Monthly Sorties per T/M/S

Enclosure (2)

2.2.1 Ready Aircraft (RA) Requirements

The Contractor will meet daily Ready Aircraft for each T/M/S as specified:

a. Ready Aircraft are defined as follows:

F/A-18F: No Equipment Operational Capability (EOC) coded J, K, L or Z discrepancies / Operational Radar.

T-38C: No EOC coded K, L or Z discrepancies.

T-6B: No EOC coded Z discrepancies / Capable of day/night IMC IAW USAF INST 21-103.

NU-1B: No EOC coded Z discrepancies.

X-26A: No EOC coded Z discrepancies other than work required to assemble for flight.

U-6A: No EOC coded Z discrepancies.

OH-58C: No EOC coded Z discrepancies / Capable of day/night IMC IAW AR 700-138.

TH-67: No EOC coded Z discrepancies / Capable of day/night IMC IAW AR 700-138.

UH-60A/L: No EOC coded Z discrepancies / Capable of day/night IMC IAW AR 700-138.

b. Performance will be recorded and calculated as follows:

RA% = RA / AA

Where:

RA = Ready Aircraft AA = Aircraft available to the Contractor

AA = T/M/S Assigned – NMCS – ISR – INST – DOD NMC Enclosure (2)

Where:

T/M/S Assigned = number of same T/M/S aircraft assigned to USNTPS NMCS = Not Mission Capable Aircraft in an AWP status. Parts on order must be directly related to the grounding discrepancy ISR = In Service Repair by depot teams (P&E, PDM, PMI, mod line) INST = Aircraft in an instrumentation modification evolution DOD NMC = Army, Navy or Air Force directed grounding bulletins (i.e. Red Stripe)

c. The Contractor will report Ready Aircraft (RA) three times daily (0700, 1300 and 1800) for each T/M/S to the MO/DMO via the Daily Ready Aircraft (DRA) report. Numbers of RA at 0700, plus the number of RA at 1300, plus the number of RA at 1800 comprise the total RA at the end of the day. Per the Daily Aircraft Report, RA% is calculated based on the daily opportunities (which disregards number of aircraft “out of reporting or NMCS”) to have RA aircraft. The results of the daily reports will be transferred to and averaged in the Monthly Ready Aircraft Report, due to the MO/DMO by 0700 the first working day after the end of each month. The RA% will be calculated for three (3) T/M/S groups, defined as follows:

2.2.1.1: Fixed Wing (F/A-18F, T-38C) 2.2.1.2: Props/Gliders (NU-1B, T-6B, U-6A, X-26A) 2.2.1.3: Rotary Wing (OH-58C, UH-60A/L, TH-67)

d. Each T/M/S will receive a Monthly Ready Aircraft (RA) Average.

e. Total Ready Aircraft Availability Average of all T/M/S will be calculated and reported monthly per following table:

For an RA% of 85% use the following guideline:

Enclosure (2)

For an RA% of 80% use the following guideline:

f. This Metric for each T/M/S group will be weighted as 15% of Performance Metric on the Contractor’s monthly performance measurement/report for USNTPS.

2.2.2 Maintenance Cancellations (MCX)

The MCX measures the effectiveness in meeting the daily flight schedule (DFS) with reliable, mission ready aircraft. Maintenance cancellations will not exceed 6.57 % of sorties scheduled for each month. The MCX percentage is defined and formulated as:

MCX(%) = MCX

SSKED

Where:

MCX = Sorties cancelled and failure to launch due to maintenance issues that render the aircraft non-flyable. Included in this definition are ground aborts prior to weight-off-wheels. Request for relief will be considered if the delay has no adverse impact to the DFS.

SSKED = Sorties scheduled on the official published DFS plus any add-on sorties.

Reporting data will be drawn from the NAS Patuxent River Flight Information Scheduling Tracker (FIST).

To receive a score of 1, the Contractor must achieve a maintenance cancelation percentage that is. <4%

To receive a score of 0, the Contractor must achieve a maintenance cancelation percentage that is >4%, <6.57 %.

To receive a score of -1, the Contractor must achieve a maintenance cancelation percentage that is. >6.57 %

This Metric will be weighted as 25% of Performance Metric on the Contractor’s monthly performance measurement/report for USNTPS.

Enclosure (2)

2.2.3 Repeat Discrepancies

The number of discrepancies that result in a ground or flight abort following maintenance to correct the same problem shall not exceed three (3) for each monthin any 30 day period. A discrepancy is considered a repeat if it is reported within five flights after the original discrepancy was repaired. Request for relief will be considered for repairs that follow a troubleshooting tree in the maintenance manual.

Repeat discrepancies are reported by flight crews in FIST and NALCOMIS/OOMA. Additionally, APT will perform weekly monitors of Aircraft Discrepancy Books (ADBs).

To receive a grade of 1, the Contractor shall have zero repeat discrepancies.

To receive a grade of 0, the Contractor shall have no more than 3 repeat discrepancies.

To receive a grade of -1, the Contractor shall have more than 3 discrepancies.

This Metric will be weighted as 15% of Performance Metric on the Contractor’s monthly performance measurement/report for USNTPS.

2.2.4 Aircraft Material Condition/Up-Gripes

The maximum allowable daily up-gripe discrepancies on RA aircraft shall be IAW Table B. For the purpose of this performance measure the following discrepancies will be excluded from the Up Gripe Target (UGT) count: valid Awaiting Parts (AWP), flyable Planning and Estimator (P&E) discrepancies, discrepancies awaiting Government disposition, TDs, Special Inspections and corrosion discrepancies, High Time Components, Post Maintenance awaiting flight or turn discrepancies (FCF requirements, TQ checks, leak checks, etc.), awaiting AIMD maintenance, and authorized relief discrepancies as approved by the MO/DMO.

TABLE B

a. Each RA aircraft, as determined by the Aircraft Maintenance Supply Readiness Report (AMSRR), will receive a Daily UGT score. Scores will be determined and recorded per the following table:

Enclosure (2)

UGT count will be determined by screening OOMA and Contractor’s Maintenance Information System Aircraft Equipment Workload Reports at 0800 each day.

b. Each T/M/S will receive a Monthly UGT Average.

c. Total Monthly UGT Average of all T/M/S will be calculated and reported monthly per the following table:

d. For the purposes of this metric, normal mathematical rounding rules apply.

15% of the Performance Metric on the Contractor’s monthly performance measurement/report for USNTPS.

2.3. Air Test and Evaluation Squadron TWO ONE (HX-21)

HX-21 performs developmental flight-testing including aircraft flying qualities, aircraft performance and aircraft systems testing. Testing of flying qualities is used to identify deficiencies related to aircraft handling qualities and their effect on mission performance. Aircraft performance testing is used to validate specification requirements and Contractor compliance, as well as to obtain and develop information pertinent to mission planning and execution. System testing is used to validate the performance of associated aircraft systems with respect to aircraft mission performance.

2.3.1 Ready Aircraft Availability

a. The Contractor will meet Daily Ready Aircraft Target Requirements (DRATR) for each T/M/S as specified in Table A:

SAR MH-60S

TABLE A

b. Daily T/M/S performance will be calculated and recorded as per the following:

Daily T/M/S Performance = T/M/S RA Total T/M/S Count – (NRAWP + NRAIM)

Where:

RA = Ready Aircraft: no EOC coded Z MAFs, no EOC coded MAFs that limit applicable testing, not in an FCF status unless authorized by the MO/DMO.

Total T/M/S Count = total number of same T/M/S aircraft in inventory

NRAWP = Non-Ready Aircraft in an AWP status

NRAIM = Non-Ready Aircraft in a instrumentation modification evolution

NRAM = Non-Ready Aircraft due to maintenance. Aircraft has an EOC coded Z MAF, or an EOC coded MAF that prevents or limits testing. Aircraft is in an FCF status unless waived by MO/DMO.

c. Each T/M/S will receive a Monthly Ready Aircraft (RA) Average.

d. Total Ready Aircraft Availability Average of all T/M/S will be calculated and reported monthly per following table:

Enclosure (2)

e. Daily status of the aircraft for this calculation shall be as of 0800 1400 and reported in the AMSRR.calculated using NALCOMIS OOMA.

f. For the purpose of this metric aircraft that are reported as a Non-Ready…