J-5 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) USNS NARRAGANSETT (TSV-4) DPMA update.docx

UNCLASSIFIED

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) USNS NARRAGANSETT (TSV-4) FY22 Dry-Docking Phased Maintenance Availability (DPMA)

Contract # Attachment J-5

MID ATLANTIC REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER (MARMC)

9727 Avionics Loop Norfolk, VA 23511

1. Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides the performance criteria, standards, and procedures for the Government’s surveillance and oversight of the Contractor’s performance to assure deliverables are timely, adequate, and complete and to assure performance is meeting the requirements specified in the contract.

2. Government Roles and Responsibilities The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities:

a. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) – The ACO shall assure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The ACO shall also assure the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The ACO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

i. Assigned ACO: Dawn Sunkins

b. Project Manager (PM) – The PM is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The PM shall keep a quality assurance file. The PM is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned PM: Veal Pope

3. Performance Standards The Performance Requirements are listed in Enclosure (1). The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the standard and assign a rating. At the end of the performance period, these ratings will be used, in part, to establish the past performance of the contractor on the contract.

4. Deducts Deducts will be based on unfavorable contractor performance as determined by the ACO. There will be monetary deducts as outlined in Enclosure (1).

5. Methods of Surveillance:

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The Government may use, and is not limited to, the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP:

a. Direct Observation: The ACO and/or PM will provide on-site oversight to assure the Contractor is adequately performing to the contract specifications.

b. Verification of documentation/deliverables provided by Contractor: Government review and assessment of deliverables (timely submission, accuracy, and completeness) and performance will be accomplished in accordance with this QASP, the Joint Fleet Maintenance Manual (JFMM), the SOW and Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs).

c. Inspections: Other inspections may be made in cases such as accident investigations, etc. Inspections shall be divided and scheduled as required.

6. Evaluation Ratings:

The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s performance of the SOW and the PM will assign a rating of either acceptable or unacceptable. The acceptable quality levels are outlined in Enclosure (1).

7. Documenting Performance

a. The Government will document positive and/or negative performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action and preparing past performance information using the Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS).

8. Frequency of Measurement

a. Frequency of Measurement. The frequency of measurement for deliverables is defined in the SOW and each CDRL. The contractor’s performance will be continuously monitored. The Government will periodically analyze whether the frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.

Enclosure (1): Performance Standards, Acceptable Quality Levels, & Deducts

b) Schedule and Associated Reports are provided in accordance with the content and format requirements stated in Table 2 within Work Item (WI) 009-60.

i. If the Government does not provide schedules/information for AIT, Government-Contracted Third Party Maintenance Providers, S/F, CIS, FMA, or other schedules/information not known to the contractor, the contractor shall provide the schedule and associated reports (including the Integrated Production Schedule) in the required timeframes to include all information known to the contractor up to 7 days prior to the date submitted.

ii. Unless otherwise directed/clarified by the supervisor, the contractor retains discretion for elements left to contractor discretion in WI 009-60. Should the supervisor provide direction or clarification on discretionary elements, the direction/clarification will take effect, for the purposes of rejection or acceptance, on the next required submission of 009-60 deliverables. Furthermore, should the supervisor and the contractor disagree as to whether an element within 009-60 is objectively required or discretionary, supervisor clarification will take effect on the next required submission of 009-60 deliverables.

iii. Rejection or Acceptance of a deliverable described in 009-60, Table 2 will be determined on whether:

a. The deliverable provided conforms to objective, non-discretionary, requirements referenced in Table 2.

b. The deliverable provided conforms to the Supervisor’s direction or clarification of the desired interpretation of objective/discretionary elements and/or clarification of the applicability of discretionary elements.

c. The deliverable is received at the time designated by 009-60.

iv. Rejection or Acceptance of a deliverable described in 009-60, Table 2 will not be determined on whether the deliverable provided satisfies the supervisor’s subjective determinations of reasonableness beyond the Rejection or Acceptance criteria in paragraph (a) above. Therefore, subjective determinations of the adequacy or reasonableness of elements, like schedule or manning plans, the contractor’s status to plans, forecasts, and mitigation plans will not be a basis for rejection.

a. $2,500 per each day the IPS is late or not provided. And;

b. $2,500 per each time the IPS is rejected by the Government due to not meeting the Performance / Acceptable Quality Level Requirement in Column (B).

i. If an IPS is rejected by the Government, additional deducts will be calculated in accordance with paragraph (a) above, for a minimum of one additional day.

a. $2,500 per each day a report is late or not provided. And;

b. $2,500 per each time a report is rejected by the Government due to not meeting the Performance / Acceptable Quality Level Requirement in Column (B).

i. If an IPS is rejected by the Government, additional deducts will be calculated in accordance with paragraph (a) above, for a minimum of one additional day.

3. Corrective Action Reports (CARs) related to safety issues

a. Level C and Level D CARs, related to safety issues are responded to within the required response date outlined in each respective CAR.

b. Contractor’s response/resolution to a Level C or Level D CAR, related to safety issues, is complete and adequate.

a. $2,500 per each day a response to a Level C or Level D CAR, related to safety issues, is past the required response date outlined in each respective CAR. And;

b. $2,500 per each time a response/resolution to a Level C or Level D CAR, related to safety issues, is rejected by the Government due to incomplete or inadequate response.

i. Rejection of the contractor’s response/resolution to a Level C or Level D CAR shall be approved one level above the PM.

ii. Responses/resolutions to a Level C or Level D CAR may be rejected more than once.

iii. If a Level C or Level D CAR is rejected by the Government, additional deducts will be calculated in accordance with paragraph (b) above, for a minimum of one additional day.

*Note: Amount to be unilaterally deducted by Government from the associated WI CLIN image1.png